datasurgeon wrote:
jraffa50 wrote:
Undaunted-001 wrote:
Actually my definition of a toll, is a poster who adds nothing to the topic. They add +1, ditto, etc. If we never had any controversy, the forums would be a dull dull place. (Yes I also go back to the time of BBS groups)
l
That's kind of your own personal definition. The internet considers anyone who stirs up controversy/tries to annoy other posters on a board or forum to be a troll.
Please don't blame Undaunted-001 for my words. Josh starts his own topics. If you disagree fine, But how can he be annoying other posters unless they add to his topic?
Please don't claim the internet has a specific exclusive definition of a troll. If that is what you consider a troll I will not disagree but there are many other definitions.
I remember long ago be part of a debate team. You would know the topic but you would not know which side you would defend. Josh is a debater but picks the side that would generate the most interest. do I agree with him, not always but I can admire his ability,
Come on now. So if I click on his post he's not really trolling me? I'm not sure why you are trying so hard to defend him against the notion of trolling. Under pretty much any basic, standard definition he is considered a troll. It may not be "exclusive", but you are working really hard to find the obscure random, made-up definition which would exclude him. He posts things to get a rise out of fellow posters. That's trolling. Whether you find it intriguing or interesting or a benefit to this forum is another thing. But his intention is to get people fired up. Just because you find it entertaining does not mean he's not trolling.
