Because, I think, everyone believe she of he knows what a troll is via sheer internet intuition, we tend to avoid the usual scientifically sound step of defining our term before using it, with the usual consequences. So, without further preamble, let’s reach a consensus definition of the term “internet troll”.
Being far from the first community to undertake this, we’ve a wealth of literature to draw from. As a start, I recommend everyone not already acquainted with it read the
wikipedia article “Troll (Internet)”.
Like many intuitive terms, “troll” is, I expect we’ll agree, a broad one encompassing many “species” (as I like to term them). It’s even believed by many troll-ologists that some species of troll are actually beneficial. For example, under some interpretations, anyone practicing the
Socratic method is, by definition, a sort of troll.
Taking time to define terms is a sidetrack from the thread’s main subject, the correlation of the psychological attributes of religiousness and trollishness, but, if the discussion is to be a coherent, communicative one, a sidetrack that IMHO needs to be taken.
----------------
Moderator: Computers and Technology; Medical Science; Science Projects and Homework; Philosophy of Science; Physics and Mathematics; Environmental Studies
