"Internet Trolls Are Narcissists, Psychopaths, and Sadists Trolls will lie, exaggerate, and offend to get a response."
Jennifer Golbeck Ph.D. Your Online Secrets [Posted Sep 18, 2014]
"In this month's issue of Personality and Individual Differences, a study was published(link is external) that confirms what we all suspected: Internet trolls are horrible people. Let's start by getting our definitions straight: An Internet troll is someone who comes into a discussion and posts comments designed to upset or disrupt the conversation. Often, in fact, it seems like there is no real purpose behind their comments except to upset everyone else involved. Trolls will lie, exaggerate, and offend to get a response. What kind of person would do this?
Some Canadian researchers decided to find out.
They conducted two online studies with over 1,200 people, giving personality tests to each subject along with a survey about their Internet commenting behavior. They were looking for evidence that linked trolling with the "Dark Tetrad" of personality traits: narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and sadism. They found that Dark Tetrad scores were highest among people who said trolling was their favorite Internet activity. To get an idea of how much more prevalent these traits To get an idea of how much more prevalent these traits were among Internet trolls, see this figure from the paper:
Look at how low the Dark Tetrad scores are for everyone except the trolls! Their scores for all four traits soar on the chart. The relationship between trolling and the Dark Tetrad is so significant that the authors write in their paper: "... the associations between sadism and GAIT (Global Assessment of Internet Trolling) scores were so strong that it might be said that online trolls are prototypical everyday sadists."
Trolls truly enjoy making you feel bad. To quote the authors once more (because this is a truly quotable article): "Both trolls and sadists feel sadistic glee at the distress of others Sadists just want to have fun ... and the Internet is their playground!"
The next time you encounter a troll online, remember:
1. These trolls are some truly difficult people.
2. It is your suffering that brings them pleasure, so the best thing you can do is ignore them."
References: Buckels, Erin E., Paul D. Trapnell, and Delroy L. Paulhus. "Trolls just want to have fun." Personality and Individual Differences67 (2014): 97-102. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/your-online-secrets/201409/internet-trolls-are-narcissists-psychopaths-and-sadists
_______________________
Your insights?
Originally posted by FMFyou have been called a legendary troll, what are your insights on being a legendary troll?
You've been called out for being a "troll" on the Spirituality Forum by several different people on numerous occasions and you have even admitted that you "troll" that forum. So what are your insights?
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHere at RHP, more often than not, X calls Y a "troll" because Y disagrees with X or because X has been shown (by Y) to have contradicted himself or to have been incoherent.
you have been called a legendary troll, what are your insights on being a legendary troll?
In Grampy Bobby's case, he has been called out several times for being a "troll" on the Spirituality Forum by other posters for things like starting threads with titles along the lines of 'What is a Troll'?, or words to that effect, in the immediate aftermath of having made a bit of an ass of himself, or having been rubbed up the wrong way, having been disagreed with, having been shown to have contradicted himself or having been incoherent [in the course of a discussion or debate that, the likes of which the forum was designed for].
That's why I've asked him for his insight.
Originally posted by FMFIs this an example of you being 'polite'?
Here at RHP, more often than not, X calls Y a "troll" because Y disagrees with X or because X has been shown (by Y) to have contradicted himself or to have been incoherent.
In Grampy Bobby's case, he has been called out several times for being a "troll" on the Spirituality Forum by other posters for things like starting threads with titles along the lines of ...[text shortened]... , the likes of which the forum was designed for].
That's why I've asked him for his insight.
Originally posted by lemon limeIt's honest, forthright and respectful. There is no dodge or deflection on my part. It's on-topic. There would be nothing to be gained from being deliberately impolite here. Nor am I calling Grampy Bobby a "troll", which would be ~ in my book ~ an impolite way of simply copping out of a discussion.
Is this an example of you being 'polite'?
You bandy about the word "troll" a lot - more than most, perhaps. You do so sometimes right in the middle of more or less polite discussions, which seems odd, although not mysterious.
Grampy Bobby gets accused of being a "troll" from time to time. It'd be interesting to see what he thinks about that accusation, and whether he thinks that the same accusation has any more validity when he levels it at people or when people like you resort to levelling it at others, as you so often do.
The word "troll" here at RHP has been devalued to mean almost nothing. I am more interested in the motivation that lies behind making the accusation.
Originally posted by FMFI used to wonder what motivated your own accusations, and why you apparently believe you're able to hide accusatory word bombs by surrounding them with self serving 'arguments'. But I lost interest in all that some time ago. You seem incapable of owning up to even the most innocuous of troll like behavior, as though everyone should automatically believe everything you say simply because you say it.
It's honest, forthright and respectful. There is no dodge or deflection on my part. It's on-topic. There would be nothing to be gained from being deliberately impolite here. Nor am I calling Grampy Bobby a "troll", which would be ~ in my book ~ an impolite way of simply copping out of a discussion.
You bandy about the word "troll" a lot - more than most, per ...[text shortened]... n almost nothing. I am more interested in the motivation that lies behind making the accusation.
If you really think consistently spewing malarkey is working for you and makes you look good, then all I can to say to you about that is "think again". 😛
Originally posted by lemon limeI don't think I am a "troll" at all. I think people who call me a "troll" are trying to sidestep the comments and questions I put forward in discussions and debates with them.
You seem incapable of owning up to even the most innocuous of troll like behavior, as though everyone should automatically believe everything you say simply because you say it.
Originally posted by lemon limePeople put themselves and their ideas 'out there' for others to consume on a message board, just as you are doing here. I don't see how I am doing anything more or out of the ordinary to "look good" ~ or 'look bad', for that matter ~ than any other man or woman in this community.
If you really think consistently spewing malarkey is working for you and makes you look good, then all I can to say to you about that is "think again".
Originally posted by lemon limeThat Grampy Bobby has been accused by several members of the Spirituality Forum over the years of "trolling" the community, is not my accusation, but a statement of fact about what has been said about him there. Indeed, he himself has admitted to "trolling" that community. So, the accusation has been levelled at him, just as he has levelled it at others. His insight into the difference between these accusations would be interesting to hear.
I used to wonder what motivated your own accusations, and why you apparently believe you're able to hide accusatory word bombs by surrounding them with self serving 'arguments'.