Hey, so I'm going to be controvercial here for a moment, so please think things through carefully before any knee-jerk responses.

Trolling is not a 'problem' on message boards, any more than computer hackers/crackers are a 'problem' to people's computers.

Why? Because the two go hand in hand. You have the message boards, you have trolls. You have networks, you have hackers.

Many people's points of views towards trolls is that you can ban them and that will 'cure' any headaches they have been given you. This is right in some ways, not in others.

I view trolling as a symptom of the state of the 'immune system' of a message board.
===
If you have for example a 'no nudity' rule and people want nudity, people will push things to the limit before they cross the line, whereupon they may cite previous precedents of allowed nudity and demand an explanation of the inconsistancy.

Just an example. Is the problem the troll who keeps pushing things? I say no. The problem is that people want nudity and they're not allowed any. (solution create porn forum or refer them to a friendly board as a policy) Others may disagree on what the problem is.
===
If you have a 'no profanity' rule and people want to swear, what do you do about the people who constantly say 'can I say this, can I say that?'. What about people who are increasingly offensive without any bad language? ( "I'd like to pork your mom in the rear!") Who's to blame? The troll or the rule? In this case that would be a case of the rule needing a rewrite from 'no profanity' to 'no offensive language or descriptions' for instance.

Let me assure you, most trolls ARE arseholes. That's not up for debate. The question I pose is are they a cause of problems or a symptom?
===
One more example (this happened to my board recently), if you have a 'no discussing tv episode downloading' rule, many people will assume it's for reasons of avoiding legal problems. (in my case the webhosts got pissed that I put up a link to my new torrent board when the board database crashed). Trolls will seek to immediately discuss legal episode downloading, legal uses for bittorent and undermining the rule. Who's to blame? The phrasing and implementation of the rules or the trolls?

Not the trolls IMO
===

Now I know I'm very much in the minority on this issue. Let me reiterate that most trolls are arseholes and if someone TURNS UP to your board and immediately trolls, ban the idiot. However longer term members can troll and you have to be prepared.

One of my last Staff discussions I held at my old forum, before being fired for unrelated issues, was that the staff were increasing labling people are 'trolls' and writing them off as valuable members of the community. Anything certain people would say would be 'trolling', any complaint, 'trolling'.

I am very passionnate on the topic of internet trolls, in fact I will be doing a presentation to the class of my graduate IT class next week on this very topic so this is practice for me.

If you check the best resource on the net about trolls, on wikipedia I'd like to direct you to "An Alternative View" that's mostly my work which reads:
One last time, trolls are arseholes, or at least regular people who will sometimes act like arseholes.

But even though the net is a big place, I don't feel that banning deleting and 'zero tolorance' policies on trolls are the way to do.

If you have a mole, don't rip it out, it might add character.

What would be the way to deal with "no-arsehole" trolls then?

I mean, I do have a no-trolling policy, I mostly use it to stop personal attacks. I have figured that most of the potential users of my board will have enough intelligence and forum experience to recognize a troll attack and defuse it themselves. But is also feel my responsability as admin to do active work to stop them. Sure, I could stay in the back and dont mind what happens with the trolls, but then I sure would feel that I'm leaving my community alone. With a fully developed community this might not be a problem, keyword is "might", I have seen communities being constantly rattled because the administration is totally absent, even with full moderation teams.

I mean, sure, trollism could be a way of the community to react to excesive authoritarism, and you must always keep a constant eye in autocriticism and all that, but that doesn't necesarilly mean that trollism should be allowed right?, after all in it's most basic definition trollism is starting a flamewar or heated discussion just for the sake of post wh*ring, when you cannot define the intention of a heated discussion then I think it's time to act for every admin or mod in the board.

__________________

Give them space to play away from people who don't like them so much. Much like you might seperate smokers and non smokers at a bar.
I know what you mean. It's important to recognise that moderators often feed trolls however.
In my experience, yes...
Not as a general rule. As I said, it's not something that you allow or disallow, more of a symptom.
Sure. But people like to do this. Human nature.
Or as I see it, not try and define a post as 'is it trolling' or 'isn't it trolling'? If you don't know where to draw the line, often it shouldn't be drawn at all.

I think the problem is the assumptions made about trolls by your definition. One who vioates a rule or pushes the envelope is not a troll. Somebody who joins and posts with the intention of causing trouble, angering the members, harming the site reputation, or spamming is a troll. And said individuals ought to be banned.

^ ^
My definition about about trolling rather than trolls specifically

I think there are distinct differences between heated discusions and complete flamewars, I also think there are distinct diferences between trolls and controversial members. I admit there are admins that use the term trolling for every opinion that might go against him or his staff, but not all can be assumed to act like this just because don't allow trolling, just the same as most reasonable admins don't call every controversial member a troll.

__________________

This is an excerpt from an interesting article by Timothy Campbell.

What is a Troll?
An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on the Internet. He (and it is usually he) tries to start arguments and upset people.

Trolls see Internet communications services as convenient venues for their bizarre game. For some reason, they don't "get" that they are hurting real people. To them, other Internet users are not quite human but are a kind of digital abstraction. As a result, they feel no sorrow whatsoever for the pain they inflict. Indeed, the greater the suffering they cause, the greater their 'achievement' (as they see it). At the moment, the relative anonymity of the net allows trolls to flourish.

Trolls are utterly impervious to criticism (constructive or otherwise). You cannot negotiate with them; you cannot cause them to feel shame or compassion; you cannot reason with them. They cannot be made to feel remorse. For some reason, trolls do not feel they are bound by the rules of courtesy or social responsibility.

Perhaps this sounds inconceivable. You may think, "Surely there is something I can write that will change them." But a true troll can not be changed by mere words.

Why Does it Matter? Some people — particularly those who have been online for years — are not upset by trolls and consider them an inevitable hazard of using the net. As the saying goes, "You can't have a picnic without ants."

It would be nice if everybody was so easy-going, but the sad fact is that trolls do discourage people. Established posters may leave a message board because of the arguments that trolls ignite, and lurkers (people who read but do not post) may decide that they do not want to expose themselves to abuse and thus never get involved.

Another problem is that the negative emotions stirred up by trolls leak over into other discussions. Normally affable people can become bitter after reading an angry interchange between a troll and his victims, and this can poison previously friendly interactions between long-time users.

Finally, trolls create a paranoid environment, such that a casual criticism by a new arrival can elicit a ferocious and inappropriate backlash.

The Internet is a wonderful resource which is breaking down barriers and stripping away prejudice. Trolls threaten our continued enjoyment of this beautiful forum for ideas.

What Can be Done about Trolls? When you suspect that somebody is a troll, you might try responding with a polite, mild message to see if it's just somebody in a bad mood. Internet users sometimes let their passions get away from them when seated safely behind their keyboard. If you ignore their bluster and respond in a pleasant manner, they usually calm down.

However, if the person persists in being beastly, and seems to enjoy being unpleasant, the only effective position is summed up as follows:

The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls.

When you try to reason with a troll, he wins. When you insult a troll, he wins. When you scream at a troll, he wins. The only thing that trolls can't handle is being ignored.

What Not to Do
As already stated, it is futile to try to "cure" a troll of his obsession. But perhaps you simply cannot bear the hostile environment that the troll is creating and want to go away for a while.

If you do that, then for the sake of the others on the system, please do not post a dramatic "Goodbye!" message. This convinces the troll that he is winning the battle. There is, perhaps, no message you can write on a message system that is as damaging as an announcement that you are leaving because of the hostility that the troll has kindled.

If you feel you must say something, a discreet message to the system operator (and some of the others users, if you have their email addresses) is the best course of action. Incidentally, if you are writing the letter in an agitated state, it is a good idea to wait an hour and then give it one last review before you actually send it. That might spare you the pain of saying things that you don't really mean to people you like.

source: http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

__________________

In the end, they WILL get attention -- either by IP banning or RO.
I prefer to give them attention WAY BEFORE THAT -- in the art of "eEvisceration."

The troll looks like a fool, we win. The troll gets attention, he wins. We all win.
In the end, who righeously gives a damn?

Oh, so the troll "gets under peoples' skin."

Whoop. De. Fark.

Ban 'im. Move on.

__________________
Möŗŧąļŀŷ Decency Defied
"In the manner of a mortal or of mortal beings."
«:Ecstacy in Decay:Gallery of Suicide:»