Meet an internet troll

[BainsBane]

We Tracked Down Our Biggest Troll…and Kind of Liked Him

If you've ever read anything on the internet, chances are you've encountered a troll. No, not the kind that live under bridges, or the ones with a shock of neon hair. We're talking about those annoying commenters who get their kicks by riling people up as much as possible. But have you ever wondered who these people really are? Well, we found out.

Internet researchers at George Mason University recently found that when it comes to online commenting, throwing bombs gets more attention than being nice, and makes readers double down on their preexisting beliefs. What's more, trolls create a false sense that a topic is more controversial than it really is. Witness the overwhelming consensus on climate change amongst scientists—97 percent agreement that global warming is real, and caused by humans. But that doesn’t settle the question for Twitter addict and Climate Desk perennial thorn in the side Hoyt Connell:

"If you allow somebody to make a comment and there's no response, then they're controlling the definition of the statement," Hoyt says. "Then it can become a truth."

We first encountered Hoyt, or as we know him, @hoytc55, several months ago on our Twitter page, taking us to task for our climate coverage. And the screed hasn't stopped since: In April alone, Hoyt mentioned us on Twitter some 126 times, almost as much as our top nine other followers combined. So we did the only thing we knew how to do: track him down, meet him face to face…and ask a few questions of our own. So we did, in Episode One: Trollus Maximus."
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/05/video-meet-climate-trolls

They've got videos about trolls and troll slayers.

[patrice]

1. K&R

[liberal N proud]

2. If you've ever read anything on DU, you've encountered a troll

This site is a magnet for trolls and we encounter them daily.

[AverageJoe90]

50. Yep, and unfortunately, there's one in this thread right now, actually.....

[BainsBane]

3. Video 1, the troll

&list=PL1ZVKOvHtj-D_HVt5ylgaoXAdKJuv9oJt

[Quantess]

36. That shattered my vision of an internet troll.

Nicely dressed, nice home, seems normal.
No cheeto stained sweatpants. No frankenstein computer held up on milk crates.

[BainsBane]

37. Ironic he's talking about how much money scientists make

off global warming. He seems pretty comfortable.

[Blue_Tires]

57. You should see some of the nastier people that have been outed

on the more unsavory reddit boards...Most of them are upstanding real-life people, too...

[BainsBane]

4. Video 2, Physics girl the troll slayer

[BainsBane]

5. Video 3, Physics girl meets the troll

[Hoyt]

6. IMO, Hoyt is a dumbass with respect to climate change, and likely more. n/t

[BainsBane]

7. no doubt

[Blue_Tires]

56. Only three people in the entire country named "Hoyt"...

You, that dude in the OP, and hall-of-famer Hoyt Wilhelm (who is deceased)

Is there something you want to tell the rest of us?

[Hoyt]

58. Hoyt Axton, but he's gone too. But there aren't many saddled with that name.

[AverageJoe90]

8. Hoyt's an idiot for sure.....though deniers aren't the only climate trolls out there.

TBH, I normally don't brag about this, but I myself am a troll slayer. Have been for a long time.....unfortunately, though, I'll admit I'm not always as skilled as I'd like to be.....

[BainsBane]

9. for sure there are many different types

I just think it's interesting to see once close up, don't you?

[defacto7]

26. no

It may be interesting to read about but I don't give any troll the time of day. I hope.

Looking at or listening to this guy doesn't give me any more information about a troll than looking at my grandmothers picture and she's dead. There is no "troll in a box" here. There's just that guy whoever he is.

[CreekDog]

48. You take down a climate change troll??? You support the ones we have

More than one of them, but one prominent, longtime libertarian climate change denier troll you agreed with constantly -your arguments were almost indistinguishable from his.

You could nail a climate denier troll, problem is you tend to agree with them, or worse make many of their arguments for them, rendering them superfluous.

[AverageJoe90]

49. Who was the "libertarian" in question, btw?

"problem is you tend to agree with them, or worse make many of their arguments for them, rendering them superfluous."

This is of course, a falsehood, though I'm curious as to why you think otherwise. And you yourself have been QUITE the troll in recent months, CD, so you really shouldn't be talking here.

[CreekDog]

52. i dare you to post a poll in GD asking which one of us is the climate change troll

brave enough to let the community here decide?

[Fumesucker]

10. A good troll is more interesting than annoying, at least to me

If someone dependably gets an emotional response from you it's quite possible that they are a troll.

Being a good troll takes a lot of skill, yes?

[BainsBane]

12. I wonder if Hoyt considers himself a troll?

[Fumesucker]

14. Troll is something you do versus something you are

I troll, you troll, we all troll from time to time.

Trolling is throwing out the bait and waiting for something to bite on it so you can set the hook and reel them in.

ETA: You are a troll when you're trolling but it's a persona you take on and off for most people.

[BainsBane]

22. interesting and reasonable point

Also note that they say inflammatory (troll-like) threads get the most attention. We certainly see that on this site, as on every other.

[RobertEarl]

31. Is this someone Trolling? You decide

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=myaccount

It's like they show up everywhere you go!!

[olddots]

41. me a troll

very strange ----I am sincerely freaked out by this

[RobertEarl]

44. Freaked out?

You have now entered: The Twilight Zone.

Don't take it personal. It's just a movie trick.

[Democracyinkind]

45. Don't worry. It's not you..

anyone clickin on that link will be taken to his own profile - kind of a DU running gag.

[olddots]

46. thanks

I'm so computer illiterate I couldn't troll myself .

[liberal N proud]

51. Very tricky

[Raine1967]

101. I see what you did there.

well played.

[BainsBane]

13. The definition of troll

In Internet slang, a troll (pron.: /ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is someone who posts inflammatory,[4] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[5] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[6]

[opiate69]

15. ...

[BainsBane]

18. I understand life can be difficult.

But that has nothing to do with me. I have absolutely nothing to do with your life and never will. Find someone else to dump on. If you have an issue with Skinner and EarlG's decision not to tombstone me, take it up with them.

If you're concerned about trolls, I suggest you examine this definition more closely:

In Internet slang, a troll (pron.: /ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as a forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm on a political message board and therefore plan to discuss politics with people who actually care about that sort of thing.

[EOTE]

63. You think part of discussing politics is using sock puppets?

People who are the least bit confident in their arguments don't need to create posters simply to agree with them. Only incredibly ignorant arguments need to be propped up by fake people.

[BainsBane]

65. I don't have a sock puppet

as you can see it was tombstoned.

[EOTE]

69. Apparently you had multiple ones.

And I'm likely to trust the administrators of the site for that information. Good ideas should be able to stand on their own.

[BainsBane]

70. false

I had one, not multiples. It's finished. Since you're so fascinated about my life, I'll refer you to this. http://www.democraticunderground.com/125519981

[EOTE]

74. So you admit to having at least one sock puppet?

And I couldn't care less about some random apology to you. It should be you apologizing for using at least one sock puppet.

[BainsBane]

76. I already did apologize. I just directed you to the link.

I apologized 1.5 months ago when the sock was tombstoned. I didn't ask anyone for an apology. I simply asked the person to leave me alone. It's old news at this point.

[EOTE]

78. It may be old news, but it still speaks to your ability to make an honest argument.

I never asked you to apologize, but again, things like that are definitely noted.

[BainsBane]

79. It had nothing to do with my ability to make an argument

If you read the link, you saw why I did it and how I mistook the meaning of one of Skinner's posts regarding double accounts. The sock is handy thing to focus on for people not interested in the substance of political issues. My arguments stand on their own merits. You can either read them or not. Your choice.

[EOTE]

81. Skinner said if it became a problem, it became a problem.

And obviously it became a problem. And I've never heard anyone who was a remotely honest debater attempt to defend the use of a sock puppet. If one had substance to begin with, they wouldn't have used a sock puppet. Your arguments obviously don't stand on their own merits.

[BainsBane]

98. He said using two accounts at once

was not in good faith, and naturally I understood his point. I had no post hidden under that name, but the existence of it was entirely inappropriate. He explained to me what he meant by good faith was if someone had an old name on DU1 or 2 (which I in fact did) but then signed up on DU3 years later and never used the old name, which I did. (That was not the banned account). He did not mean that anyone should use two accounts at once. He was gracious in not TSing me, and I am grateful for that. It was a stupid thing, and I won't do it again. As far as I'm concerned that's the end of the story.

Now, some people have always hated me--one person quite intensely. Before the sock one individual posted other crap. Now that person repeatedly posts this. I myself would think people would have better things to do in life than spend so much time thinking about someone they clearly dislike.

[CokeMachine]

71. I guess some animals are just more equal??? nt

[LanternWaste]

59. I imagine there are quite a few people who agree with her assessment-

I imagine there are quite a few people who agree with her assessment-- regardless of whether you consider it fruitless or not.

[opiate69]

64. I'm sure, but...

If you remove the socks, that "quite a few" diminishes exponentially...

[winter is coming]

17. Wow, that's wordy.

I always thought "shit-stirring timewaster" was sufficient.

[BainsBane]

20. derailing threads off topic is key

yet some specialize in it. But yeah, your definition is good enough.

[BainsBane]

25. I would like to request that you please leave me alone

entirely. Thank you.

[UtahLib]

33. He just can't seem to resist you.

Seems to be exhibiting himself as a real live example as defined by your OP. Please allow me to suggest giving his chosen agenda no attention or traction whatsoever. Nasty bullies deserve nothing more than to wallow in their own bile.

[BainsBane]

34. You're correct

Someone suggested I ask him to leave me be so I thought I'd try again. I now plan to do exactly what you suggest.

[Apophis]

24. I don't understand why that particular poster wasn't PPRed after that.

[Electric Monk]

72. Jury results (sorry BainsBane, your alert failed badly)

In fact, I'd say you got lucky that it didn't go 0-6.

At Tue May 21, 2013, 03:27 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Nor do I.. especially considering that there is precedent
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2879684

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Entered this thread purely to shit stir. Skinner already hid his signature line calling attention to the sock I have banned well over a month ago. Now he stalks me constantly to harass me. This is predatory behavior for the sake of cruelty and nothing else. Yes, I screwed up by having a sock but Skinner allowed me to stay, and this guy has made his mission to harass me because he hates my views on certain issues. His behavior is disruptive and entirely counterproductive to any kind of political discussion. His only purpose is to sow discord. Is this a discussion board or a place for small people to engage in constant bullying?

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 21, 2013, 03:35 PM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: You started the 'troll' thread. What was your purpose in that - other than to stir up some shit. Pot, meet kettle.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: He has cited his proof. If facts are to be considered "over the top" or "rude" or "inappropriate," then I'm afraid that's going to make any sort of discussion pretty much impossible. The complaining poster admits that he/she screwed up by creating a sock account. Well, you're just going to have to own up to your mistakes.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I see nothing wrong with pointing out the *fact* that another user was caught red-handed with a sock-puppet. As others have noted, it's surprising BB wasn't banned outright for that.

[opiate69]

75. Thanks...

[BainsBane]

77. right, because there isn't enough drama already

Now posting articles from Mother Jones is trolling, while the Daily Mail and the other RW tabloids are posted regularly to great reception.

[Electric Monk]

84. That jury vote had nothing to do with Mother Jones or The Daily Mail. It was about your sock(s). nt

[BainsBane]

85. read juror number one's comments

S/he said my OP was shit stirring. My OP Is an excerpt from Mother Jones.

[msanthrope]

29. Oh.....nice catch. nt

[Egalitarian Thug]

27. Where are you appearing? Is there a cover?

[defacto7]

28. The guy in the OP is not a troll

Once he is known... he's not a troll, just an attention ho.

[hfojvt]

30. I always understood it to have a different meaning

That a "troll" is not "a person trying to stir things up" but rather, in the case of this board 1) somebody who is not really a Democrat, but pretends to be one, while at the same time constantly berates Democrats and argues for conservative, or non-progressive points of view.

But there would be another "type" as well - the Green troll. Which would be a progressive/liberal person who hates the Democratic Party and supports some sort of 3rd party and is here on DU trying to convince other progressives of the futility of voting for Democrats or supporting Democrats.

But each of those trolls has the same goal - to weaken the Democratic Party. One wants to strengthen the left at the expense of the DNC and the other wants to strengthen the right.

At least I think that is how the word troll is being used on this board, as more of a double agent than just a pot-stirrer, although certainly double agents might also have an agenda of stirring the pot as well - as a means to disrupt the site and disarm what might otherwise be an effective weapon against the RWNM.

[Warren DeMontague]

32. There seem to be many different kinds of trolls.

Like this Hoyt guy- I mean, he's wrong on Climate Change, but he sincerely seems to believe what he's spouting. That makes him annoying, and wrong, but I would put him in a different category from other sorts of trolls, like the ones who don't actually subscribe to the ideologies or divisions they're pushing, they just do what they do for shits and giggles, or "the lulz". To piss people off and watch the reaction.

[BainsBane]

35. Yes, I think they chose him because he bombards

them with negative tweets. They seem to be some climate change organization.

[Warren DeMontague]

38. It's interesting, too, to see how he's a semi-reasonable guy until the FOX talking points start.

At the end, though, when he's like "If I'm wrong, it's just better for the plants"... grrrr. Meanwhile I'm right now reading the current energy issue of Popular Science (that noted eco-librul bastion of tree huggery) in an article where they speculate based on ice cores from the interim period between the two previous ice ages, that a 2C temperature rise could involve a much greater rise in Sea Levels than is currently believed. Yeah, dude, great for (some) plants, not so great for, say, downtown Manhattan or LA.

And it goes without saying that we'll see more storm activity like we did today. Sigh.

[BainsBane]

40. They think it's about the "planet"

which they don't care about. What it's really about is human civilization and the conditions we are going to live under.

[Warren DeMontague]

42. There's a lot of denial.

I'm at the point, with that issue, that I think arguing with folks like that is just a waste of time. That guy obviously tuned out the minute he saw Al Gore on a movie screen connected to the words "global warming". Even if one DOES convince them, it's not going to net effect a ton of change. Maybe that's defeatist.

Personally, I conserve, I splurged on a ton of LED light bulbs when they finally came to Costco (which did actually make a noticeable dent in the power consumption), we're on a 100% renewables energy plan (fortunate in that we're one place in the country where we can make that decision)... compost, try to reduce the impact as much as possible. But the whole problem is a lot bigger than that.

I feel like we are inevitably going to bear the brunt of some large climate shifts, even IF (big IF) the human race comes up with some sort of technological hail mary pass in the next couple decades along the line of scalable fusion power.

In the meantime, though, that PopSci article is a decent read; like some interesting stuff about developments in solar energy, which has really made some amazing strides in recent years.

[BainsBane]

53. the deniers have made themselves irrelevant

the question now is how we are going to deal with it and how much it is costing us in disaster relief, higher food prices, etc. . I looked on the Popular Science website and didn't see the article. I may have to look at a newsstand or hang out in Barnes and Noble to read it.

I dealt with the insurance claims agent about the car today. He was actually very nice about it. (I can't believe I'm saying that about an interaction with an insurance company). He gave me a check and said if it costs more, which it probably will, the body shop should contact him. He also said he didn't think it would affect my premiums since it wasn't an accident. So I'll be $500 out of pocket for my deductible but hopefully no more.

[Warren DeMontague]

54. That's good- except for the $500 bucks part, at least.

Do you know if they caught the shooter?

...

Anyway, yeah, you may not be able to access it yet. I subscribe to the paper edition, one of my guilty pleasures. Just can't get used to reading magazines on a device.

[BainsBane]

62. No, but I haven't checked

The crime scene dug some bullets out of another person's car. If the gun was used in another crime they may have a record. I expect it's not the highest priority given that no one was hurt. I was actually a bit surprised they took it so seriously. We have a notoriously bad police force in Minneapolis. They have been investigated by the FBI for corruption several times. They did nothing when my aunt's car was stolen, despite the fact they pulled someone over in it for running a red light. She got her car back but they didn't press the case. The person driving the car said her boyfriend had given it to her. How hard could it have been to get his name? They took the shooting fairly seriously. I suppose they don't like people shooting up residential neighborhoods any more than we do. Those people are bound to kill a bystander soon if they haven't already.

[Kalidurga]

39. The irony is thick with this thread...

[hootinholler]

47. I resisted making the same comment

Nice to see I'm not alone.

[Junkdrawer]

66. Ya think?

[BainsBane]

68. okay, how am I a troll?

Go on.

[Junkdrawer]

87. Not referring to you....

It's the trolls calling out the real DUers as trolls...

Any more, you need a logic parser to read DU. My head hurts.

[BainsBane]

88. I hear you.

[Junkdrawer]

93. Somedays.....

I'm reminded of an old 60s movie (forget which one ((Casino Royale??)) ) where, in the end, one agent reveals himself and puts the collar on someone only to have THEM reveal they are an agent working for a different spy agency. Soon 10 or 15 in the room do the same.

Fights break out as each accuses the other as never respecting each other's turf.

[name not needed]

99. You make sockpuppet accounts to get around alert restrictions.

[BainsBane]

100. Yes, I made a sock

one, not plural. That sock was active for 48 hours in terms of posting and alerting. It was banned more than 1.5 months ago. It was a stupid and irresponsible thing to do. I did not make it for the reasons Skinner thinks, though I don't believe another reason makes creating the sock any less appropriate. If anyone is interested, they can read about it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/125519981

Creating the sock was stupid and irresponsible, and I won't be doing it again. I am doing my best to get along better with others here on DU and am succeeding in that I haven't had a thread hidden in 52 days. I can't erase what happened, but I can try to improve my ongoing behavior.

[winter is coming]

103. What restrictions? The only one I'm aware if is that you can't alert for 24 hours

if your alert goes 0-6. Is it really that hard to live without alerting for 24 hours or is there some other restriction?

[Blue_Tires]

60. I hate that I've never been able to find the story from 7-8 years ago

when Mother Jones profiled one of the ORIGINAL creators/distributors of RW astroturf e-mails (back when they were still a really big thing)...It was shocking to see how well-oiled the propaganda network was, and how he only had to send an e-mail to a few prominent RW bloggers for it to quickly circulate and *EVERYONE* to eventually get it...

[BainsBane]

67. Have you tried a periodicals database?

available through university libraries? I bet one of the ProQuest databases catalogs Mother Jones.

[Blue_Tires]

73. Yeah, I'd searched the online archives of a few sites

I *think* it was Mother Jones (best guess), but it could've been TNR, The Nation, UTNE, or any of the other magazines I was reading then...I'd searched them all years ago with no luck, because I was desperately trying to prove a point to someone at the time...

[Nye Bevan]

61. Hilarious example of a thread taking an unexpected turn (nt)

[Kingofalldems]

82. I have always been the one, the only.

Didn't know what a sock puppet was until Meta.

Anyone else miss Meta?

[Quantess]

91. Meta lives on in this thread!

Meta never died, apparently.
Anyway, creating a sock just to get around the alert restrictions... tsk, tsk. Now we also know who is a serial alerter.

[Eleanors38]

95. I thought GD was the Guns-Dogs forum.

[cui bono]

83. "If you allow somebody to make a comment and there's no response,

then they're controlling the definition of the statement," Hoyt says. "Then it can become a truth."

This is why I think the ignore list is a bad thing and should be abolished on DU.

[BainsBane]

86. When I get sick of an argument, I quit reading the responses

I don't feel I've lost control at all. Firstly, I don't see a discussion as about control. It's exchange, and when that exchange ceases to be fruitful, I see no point in continuing. That's when I'm at my best. I have gotten pulled into pointless exchanges. I prefer, however, if I can avoid them.

[ucrdem]

89. Strange article. So paid junk science spewers are really nice guys?

Hoyt the 'troll' is pretty clearly a pro but the article doesn't mention his job, neither does the first video where he's interviewed in his house, though we hear about his lovely family and his battle with cancer. And it's produced like promo video, which, I suspect, it is.

What the heck is it doing in MJ?

[ucrdem]

94. "Professional trolls" -- DU link from 2006:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1438787

If this guy isn't a pro I'd be very surprised.

[Blue_Tires]

102. Very sad to look at all those great, colorful names

I haven't seen in years

[One_Life_To_Give]

90. Once you read Asprin's MythAdventures Series you never see Troll's the same

I always think of Chumley and Tananda. Brother and Sister aka Troll and Trollop.

[lumberjack_jeff]

96. Every thread without a troll is a monologue.

How's that for a troll?

[BainsBane]

97. Some seem to define troll

as anyone who disagrees with them, so in those terms, you're right.