I first heard the term "troll" nearly a half-century ago, when Iheard an adaptation of the Norwegian fairy tale, "Three Billy GoatsGruff." If I recall, the ending was sanitized, with the eldest goatsimply butting the troll out of the story (rather than poking outhis eyes and crushing him into troll powder).
In the mid- to late 1960s, troll dolls - whimsical, big-eyedfigures with long, frizzed-out hair - were the rage among pre-teenand teen girls.
Now, in the 21st century, we are dealing with trolls of adifferent sort.
An urban language dictionary defines a troll as "someone whoposts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an onlinecommunity " with the primary intent of provoking other users into anemotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topicdiscussion."
The term troll fits on a couple of levels. They are consideredevil, like the fairy tale character lurking under the bridge andthreatening the goats. And they "troll" the Internet, like afisherman trolls for a big catch, hoping to snag an emotionalreaction.
For most editors and Webmasters whose sites carry message boards,user comments are a big headache.
Negativity is the biggest reason. Many folks interested inengaging in mature, serious debate on a topic usually abandon theconversation in short order after being targeted by trolls.
Misunderstanding about message boards contributes to ourchallenge. Some assume that if the comments appear on a particularWeb site - our THonline.com, for example - the owner of the site pre-approves, condones or endorses them. Not so, under theCommunications Decency Act of 1996.
Still, we set terms of service that allow us to remove any andall comments at our discretion. Likewise, we can restrict or refuseany individuals or their posts.
Hey, wait a minute! Isn't it a First Amendment issue? No. Firstof all, the First Amendment states that government may not restrictspeech. There is no obligation for a non-governmental entity (suchas a newspaper) to publish, broadcast or post anything, including anindividual's comments. It is our Internet site, and we can set ourrules.
At the TH, we require that users have their identities verifiedbefore they may post comments. Users whose comments frequently oregregiously violate terms of service are subject to suspension oroutright ban. Such action typically follows a complaint from anotheruser.
Coincidentally, the users who complain and are the subject ofcomplaints are often in the same small circle. In a typical week,fewer than 200 (out of about 6,000) registered users post at leastone comment on THonline.
We don't allow comments on stories involving topics where the"conversation" has a history of turning incendiary or otherwisebeing problematic. That includes articles involving law enforcement,courts and race.
Even a preliminary article on a fatality - from a trafficaccident to a murder - can pose a problem. Typically, the name ofthe deceased is withheld from our initial reports while relativesare notified. That did not stop some users from posting the victim'sname. If it were you, is that how you would like to learn of a lovedone's passing - on a message board?
Other users have used message boards to disparage the deceased ortheir families.
Message boards can be a worthwhile vehicle for publicconversation and debate - more than 172,000 have appeared on oursite - but mean-spirited comments and troll-like behavior havetainted the experience for many people. However, the TH and otherhosts are considering further steps to preserve (or restore) thepotential of the service. Your suggestions are welcome.
Cooper's e-mail address is bcooper@wcinet.com.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий