bishopdante

That would indicate that people would have to become widely trustworthy and rigorous.

morality is not a boolean thing. Now that is absolutely bang on.

You see, a moral is extracted from a story, it is interpretation. Good stories don't have to spell it out. Some stories have many morals. Some stories the moral of the story is it's hard to find the morals, or the boundaries.

The quality which we are looking at is that of unassailable power. That's what makes people behave in an assertive an non-compliant way.

Cars give people that, guns give people that, web skills give people that.

Now that gives me a business idea...

The university of troll. A website where should you supply enough bogus posts, you get posted a certificate... of course you have to pay a course fee. $100 should do it.

Forums used to be the province of the technorati. Not no more they ain't.

any publicity is good publicity

There is no automatic 100% defense against any tactic.

It's really interesting the idea of being able to tag posts with a rating which describes their quality, such as "annoying" "boring" "funny" or "relevant" rather than just plus minus some points.

HAHAHA! I know the adequacy.org one. That had me in stitches for weeks.

a court with no jester is destined to become pompous and corrupt.

No, watergate was not trolling, because it was not a forum game. Watergate was a scam, it was also an accident (getting rather busted).

Trolling is a scam performed for the purposes of a humorous prank on a discussion board.

Watergate was a scam to pervert the course of democratic government.

It's simple, trolls prey on people's inner asshole. It's like a form of bullying, if you rise to the bait, then you're done. There's no technical fix, there's a mentality fix. The act is as old as the hills, and they provide balance to the debate. Trolls are a form of court jester.

I am therefore pro-troll and anti troll-victim.