Discussion in 'Chit Chat' started by Bruto Blukowski, Jul 28, 2006.

  1. Z will have to troll two forums now.

    How much of a pay raise did he get for this new arrangement?
  2. I was reading in a forum dedicated to Canadian FX brokers when I came across this. Who could believe that the author did not have zEvader in mind when he wrote it? It is a step by step illustration of the troll's tactics.


    of course, nothing will ever beat this masterpiece


    You can often spot posters worth ignoring via one or more of the following classical crank attributes:

    They are unwilling to be mistaken. They never acknowledge error,
    even on trivial matters. Even when presented with literal quotes
    from their own earlier postings, about the most you will get is a
    non-denial denial that they wrote it.

    Despite their incredible volumes of postings, they never seem to
    have time to respond to pointed remarks that expose flaws in their
    arguments. When they quote from on-target articles, they only copy
    irrelevant text. Changing the topic (misdirection) is a mainstay of
    their technique.

    Argument by repetition, unsupported claim, context-dropping and
    spin-doctoring: They rely on "facts" not in evidence and never seem
    to have time to post in-context references that might support their
    conclusions. Anything quoted is out of context, and may not even be
    from a discussion on the same topic. They stubbornly assume that
    their interpretation is the only correct one.

    Double Standards
    They threaten others whose articles are actually less offensive than
    their own.

    Their articles often contain actionable material.

    They are incapable of remembering their past errors and lies, much
    less adjusting their behavior to avoid repeating previous outrages.

    They indirectly acknowledge the weakness of their position by
    resorting to all the normal underhanded tricks of incompetent
    debaters, plus copious volumes of ad hominem; from simple
    name-calling to sophomoric psychological judgementalism.

    Just because it looks like English, don't assume it is, depending on
    how you define "is".

    Obsessed and Disconnected
    After you've been reading their stuff for a while, you begin to
    realize that they seem to be driven by some central theme, but are
    writing in what is ultimately just a /simulation/ of a human
    language. It looks vaguely familiar on the surface, but is not
    firmly connected to reality, much less the topic at hand.

    Their command of their language is so weak, and the intellectual
    content of their prose is so vacuous, that they have to "punch it
    up" with words intended to mock, provoke, shock and/or hurt. Without
    those words, they'd have a great deal less to say.

    They are fully capable of reading all of the above, and failing to
    recognize that they meet most or all of these criteria.