Issue Eight - uncopy

the way the BBC handled the whole issue?Is there something at stake here?SK This is a really difficult question,because you can’t generalize. In thiscase, I really don’t like the way the BBCis approaching the troll. He had no realchance. The sole purpose of the interviewon the street was to make him look likea stupid sociopath. It could have beenreally interesting to find out about hismotivations, but obviously the BBC wasnot interested in this. If you want tofind out about a trolls motivation, youshouldn’t be so extremely judgemental,but rather respect them, even if the troll ISa sociopath.On the other hand, this guy is not a goodtroll at all. While I found it extremelydifficult and overbearing to point out theborder between morally bad and goodtrolling, I tried to give it some direction.Just writing insults on a memorial pageon Facebook is as creative as randomlypunching a twelve year old schoolgirlin the face. Creativity is somehow anindicator of quality here.There is however some kind of guideline totrolling in my book.Julian Dibbell wrote:the Internet is serious business’ meansexactly the opposite of what it says. Itencodes two truths held as self-evident byGoons and /b/tards alike — that nothing onthe Internet is so serious it can’t be laughedat, and that nothing is so laughable aspeople who think otherwise.While there is nothing more ridiculousthan people taking certain things on theInternet too serious, it is quite normalto care about your real-life. When I’musing the term real-life, please note thatit does not necessarily exclude onlineactivities. Life on the Internet is real tooand sometimes it matters and other timesit doesn’t. Deciding where to draw theborder is one of the most important thingswhen it comes to identity on the Internet.Ruining this real-life and laughing aboutpeople taking it seriously is, contradictoryto mocking people who are taking weirdaspects of online life too serious, the lamestvariation of trolling.The comments on the video are interesting,in that they somewhat resemble the21unfiltered view of the users. While someare just negative about trolling, others goin the direction of “trolling can be fun, butthis guy is not even a real troll for he is justrandomly insulting people.”This is also somewhat similar to myopinion.Trolls should judge their own actionsand try to be as creative as possible andto create maximum lulz! By just hurtingpeople that are legitimately grieving fortheir lost ones, you are neither creative,nor are you creating lulz for anybody elsethan yourself.After all, this video shows the badreputation of trolling in traditional mediaversus the more sophisticated reputationof trolling among the users (comments). Ireally like this confrontation.MS In your view trolling as a culturalphenomenon is closely linked toanonymity. Do you feel like trollingshouldn’t happen on social networks likeFacebook or Google+ or that it should bedone in a different way? I’m thinking thatyou’ll probably feel more “entitled” to trolla friend rather than a stranger, but thenwhere’s the lulz…SK While I link trolling to anonymity, I alsodo link it to identity or pseudonymity. Atfirst this sounds conflicting, but at a closerlook, it is not. Both anonymity and identityare listed as techniques against trollingin different sources I reviewed and itperfectly makes sense.The idea of trolling linked to anonymity issomehow obvious:If everybody is anonymous, you cannot bemade accountable for your actions. Yourtrue self remains hidden and this makes itreally hard for you to be confronted withyour own actions.On the Internet, this is known as JohnGabriels Greater Internet FuckwadTheory or, in psychology, as the onlinedisinhibition effect.On the other hand, people are morelikely to expect trolling in anonymousenvironments. That’s why 4chan hasthe rule “Pics or it didn’t happen!”.Timestamping is also a necessarytechnique to get credibility in anonymous