jraffa50 wrote:
fastdan1 wrote:
adidas4fun68 wrote:
jraffa50 wrote:
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.
why are you clicking on his threads if you believe him to be a troll?
Why are you trying so hard to make sure noobs view him as a troll?
If some people find him entertaining then for those people he is not a troll, why do you find this so hard to accept?
How does labelling his behaviour as a troll help anyone?
Who's "trying so hard to make sure noobs view him as a troll"? The OP asked the question.
I could care less about his posts. I rarely read them. But the idea that he's not a troll, based on someone's personal definition, to me was silly and I responded to it. I can make up my own definitions to words too, but that doesn't help anyone. As I said, he may be entertaining and funny, but if his intention is to get people agitated, that's him being a troll.
so, in answer to my questions
1) no answer
2) no answer
3) no answer
4) no answer
Hmm, your post really advanced my understanding of your viewpoint. Not.
