The Troll FAQ V 1.1 Part 3
Comments4u
v 1.1
Contents
Part 1
Introduction
Thread Starters
Part 2
Engagements
Part 3
Ethics
Part 4
Attitude
Part 5
Sources
The Troll FAQ v 1.1
Part 3
ETHICS
Are there ethics? Some may think not. But all humans
place some limits on their activities. A good troll
determines in advance what he will not do. There cannot
be enough emphasis on consistency. A troll who decides to
do something *this time* because of a thought the normally
inappropriate act is justified by the current situation is
on the way to problems.
Ethics aren't something that can be turned on an off based
on the situation. A troll who follows situation sensitive
ethics in reality doesn't have ethics. Its best to decide
in advance, not during the heat of battle, what's fair and
what's not, make a record of ethics, and refer to it often.
Net Abuse
Trolling may be abuse on the net, but abuse of the net
cannot be considered trolling. Things considered abuse
of the net are the sorts of things against the rules of
most service providers. Abuse of the net includes:
Cancels of posts made by others
Use of another poster's e mail address
Use of an invalid address at a valid domain
Flooding
Forging approvals in moderated groups
Excessive crossposting and/or multiposting
Posting or mailing viruses
Mail bombing
Alteration or deletion of web information
Hacking into computers or systems
Concerning use of another poster's e mail, generally
referred to as forgery, note that parody impersonations
aren't forgery. What matters is actually owning the
address.
Domain forgery usually occurs by accident when someone
makes up an address assuming the domain isn't valid. For
example, avoidliketheplague.com would be assumed by many
not to be a valid domain, but it is. Never assume a
domain name is invalid without checking. The best choice
is to always post with a real e mail address you own.
There is no generally accepted numerical definition of a
flood, but *I know one when I see one* applies. Generally,
if a person is posting so much as to make a group unusable,
particularly if morphing is involved, it may be considered
a flood. Often, those who flood post articles that are
substantially identical. Doing that enough results in the
articles qualifying as spam, which may be canceled.
What constitutes excessive crossposting will vary. Having
more than ten groups in the newsgroups field is a violation
at some service providers. Some prevent posts to more than
ten groups. A few set the limit at five.
But even without a limit from a troll's service provider,
there are other considerations. Usenet is not an entity with
one universally applicable set of rules/procedures, as some
presume.
Crossposting to seven or eight groups in alt.* probably
won't attract any attention. But include seven alt.* groups
and one in some local hierarchies, and a troll might find
cancels or NoCeMs being issued against him, along with
complaints to his service provider. Its not the most liberal
rule set that applies; its the most restrictive.
Even if complaints to the service provider aren't an issue,
breaking rules for the simple reason it can be done isn't
much of a reason. Instead, trolls should consider rules
restrictions that will help them become better.
There are ample indications when a troll needs to adopt
better ethics. Complaints acted on by his service provider,
by warnings or termination of service, are a strong signal.
Attracting attention from those who issue cancels or NoCeMs
for spam or excessive crossposting/multiposting are another.
Topicality
It may seem strange to include this in the ethics section,
but the willingness of a troll to post on topic is a
decision based on his ethics. Ethical trolls post on topic.
But the first problem is to determine what is on topic.
Assuming thread starters in a non-disrupted group, *on
topic* means the topics the group was created for and
topics made acceptable by current group usage. Ethics
require a troll to post on topic.
Most groups don't stay strictly with the topic listed in
their Charter (if any) or the topic that could be presumed
from the group name. It is appropriate for a troll to
encourage topic drift. It is not appropriate for him to
initiate it.
Sometimes, a grouper becomes an issue in a group. If the
groupers initiate it, even though encouraged by a troll,
its acceptable to treat a grouper as the topic.
However, sometimes, the troll becomes the issue.
There's a difference between what a troll posts being the
issue, and the troll himself being the issue. If a troll
himself becomes the issue, its time for him to move on.
Although a grouper is an appropriate topic for a group,
a troll isn't, since he's an outsider.
Morphing
If a troll has to morph to be read, he's worn out his
welcome. Morphing for the purpose of beating killfiles
isn't ethical. A troll must respect the choice of
groupers not to read his posts. *Morph* refers to a
situation where a troll posts basically the same things
under more than one name. This is different than the
creation of personnas who post differently and which are
non-transparent creations of one poster.
Grouper Complaints
Grouper complaints in a group about non-net abuse troll
activities have one best response from a troll: killfile
me. What is important about this is the troll can't state
this if he has morphed to beat killfiles. Creation of
multiple non-transparent personnas that truly act
differently isn't morphing to beat killfiles. If a troll
has kept his act clean, he can suggest killfiles and
groupers who are irritated with their fellow groupers for
feeding the troll often turn on their own and support the
troll's position.
In the event substantial x posts are involved, the troll
may also suggest n-filter to the groupers. Such statements
place the choice to read and respond on the groupers. When
a group is disrupted, groupers who oppose it must perceive
that fellow groupers have a reasonable ability not to
respond, and that those groupers, by their own choices,
are responsible for disruption.
Also important is the troll's posting volume. If the
groupers are posting more than the troll, he can blame
them for disruption. It may be that the troll provoked
these posts, but clearly a grouper always has the option
not to respond, especially if the troll hasn't morphed so
that killfiles can be effectively used by groupers.
Complaints by groupers to a troll's service provider
aren't cause for concern if a troll has behaved ethically.
Obviously, if a troll has engaged in net abuse (rogue
cancels, excessive x posting, forgeries, or floods, as
examples) he may be in trouble with his service provider.
Complaints about the content of posts might receive some
consideration by a service provider. If a troll has
posted clearly off topic, x posted to irrelevant groups,
initiated unprovoked flames of groupers, or used *naughty
words* in excess of what is typical for the group, he
may be in trouble. If he has not done these things, then
such complaints will probably be viewed as being complaints
based on personal dislike for the troll, and will not be
considered actionable by the service provider.
Trolls who find themselves in a position of searching for
a service provider with a more liberal Terms of Service
agreement (TOS) or Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) should
instead consider their own actions. A revision of the
troll's ethics is often more appropriate.
Fragile Groupers
Trolling groups where groupers are excessively fragile
in an emotional sense is a bad idea. Such groupers may
be present in numbers almost anywhere, but are more likely
to be found in alt.support.* groups. Lurking carefully
and evaluating early reactions to trolls is important in
determining fragility. An easier method is to decide in
advance that support groups are off limits.
Sometimes, its not a group but an individual grouper who
should be left alone. A poster who has established himself
as a bona fide and unreformable kook is best left alone.
Withdrawals
As stated by Cappy Hamper in the alt.troll FAQ, trolling
isn't intended to bring about the end of Usenet. And
destroying a newsgroup may be considered a step in that
direction.
Trolls should withdraw when asked politely to do so by
some of the groupers. A troll should withdraw even if
not asked if a group becomes substantially disrupted by
troll activity.
More difficult is to decide whether to leave when the
groupers haven't asked politely. As an example, groupers
in alt.pizza.delivery-drivers fought Meow until their
group was destroyed. alt.religion.asatru groupers fought
Meow until their group was a smoking crater. Neither
group politely asked the trolls to leave.
There is also the issue of internal disrupters. A good
example is us.military.army, which on several occasions
remained disrupted due to grouper activity even when
the trolls left. rec.skiing.alpine wound itself up with
internal disrupters for years, even before trolls arrived.
In these examples, grouper behavior was such that it
was difficult to justify a withdrawal. There was no
*voice of reason* among the groupers, and every
indication the groupers wanted to continue with the
disruption.
It is, however, sometimes best for trolls to make a
decision that the groupers have *had enough*. To a
degree, trolls must be *their brother's keeper*, since
groupers often lack the competence to see their actions
are leading to newsgroup destruction. This idea may
have applied in some of the examples above. although
no one acted on the concept.
Trolls who continue to attack what are obviously
inept and nearly helpless targets, whether they are
groups or individual groupers, are revealing some
things about themselves.
Picking such targets indicates a need to win that is
so strong the troll won't accept anything challenging
that would include the possibility of defeat. This
indicates the troll himself has a fragile ego. He
picks easy targets because his own ego isn't strong
enough that he can risk the possibility of losing.
Trolls who pick pitifully weak targets will never
savor the sweeter taste of victory in an engagement
that included the risk of losing.
Withdrawal Terms
A negotiated withdrawal should include an agreement
that groupers, if they are netcopping without basis,
or engaging in net abuse themselves, to stop these
activities. It should definitely not include an
agreement to never troll the group again.
To sell the withdrawal, trolls will have the best
situation when they have the support of respected
groupers. That they have this support should be
plainly stated in the withdrawal, and these groupers
credited with ending the troll activity.
Real Life
Trolling is matching wits on Usenet. The contest
must be confined to the *level playing field* of
Usenet.
What someone posts on Usenet is fair game. But real
life investigations into what someone posting with
their real name does in real life by someone not
using their real name (or a common and virtually
untraceable one) shouldn't strike anyone as fair.
It's advisable to consider complaining to a person's
service provider a possible venture into real life.
Complaining about abuse on the net makes a troll
look like a typical semi-rational, highly irritated
grouper. That's not an image appropriate for a troll.
Generally, trolls shouldn't complain to service providers.
Its like calling for outside, authoritative help, and
asking for such help implies a troll can't survive on
his own. That doesn't support the idea trolls are
superior to groupers.
Abuse of the net may be a different matter. However,
it might be better, depending on the circumstances,
to use grouper's forgeries, rogue cancels, or floods
as an issue to troll about, rather than reporting them
to their service provider. Sometimes, someone else can
be trolled into reporting a grouper's abuse of the net.
But complaining to a service provider is emulating grouper
behavior. Its important for trolls to maintain themselves
as being *above* the methods, failings, and attitudes of
groupers. After all, trolls think they're superior to
groupers, but they're not if they do what groupers do.
If some one has hurt a troll's feelings, and he's
having a hard time getting over it, maybe a new hobby
is in order.
Review
Trolling may be abuse on the net, but abuse of the net
isn't trolling.
Be careful about group selection. Some groups shouldn't
be trolled. Some groupers shouldn't be trolled.
Watch for signs a withdrawal is needed. Don't destroy
groups. Don't push an individual completely over the
edge.
Don't morph to beat killfiles. Recommend killfiles to
complaining groupers. Various non-transparent personnas
aren't morphs.
When leaving, thank the groupers for a good time.
Keep real life out of Usenet.
--
There is nothing more exhilarating than to be shot at
without result. --- Winston Churchill