Y'all know I'm a relative newbie here, and I'm still trying to find my niche, although I'm getting closer. I've started reading further afield, and one of the things that has been popping up lately is the subject of trolls. I was visiting Wazzup, -e's- site, and came across this definition for trolls:
troll /v.,n./ [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it.
Is there a book out called "Blogging for Idiots"??? It's really embarrassing to put your foot in it, and not even know that you've done it. Maybe there's a Miss Manners of the Blog world who can advise me, and keep me out of trouble.
Actually......for those of you in the same boat, read the comments posted to Eric's blog on July 17, titled "Free Speech, trolls, and sissies." It's nice to know that there are other bloggers out there who have more experience and are just as clueless about trolls.
I'm really relieved that I've missed out on the entire Usenet scene. Flaming is not a way of life that excites me. Perhaps I will simply go and read, and withhold comment until I have sharpened my logic and language skills.
Until then, you can expect posts on food, family life, friends, life questions, books, music, theater and occasionally, sex.
Comments (16)
WE WANT SEX! WE WANT SEX! :-)
Posted by Mad Bull | July 22, 2003 12:49 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 12:49
yeah, yeah, yeah...
I KNEW that would get your attention! lol I'm going to have to create an anonymous blog to post raunchy sex so that I can preserve the image of purity here.
Just for the Sarge, I'll put up a trapeze! *G*
Posted by Buffy | July 22, 2003 1:28 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 13:28
the sex posts sound pretty good to me to!!
Image of purity??
perhaps they don't know you as well as I do...LMAO
Posted by Redeagle | July 22, 2003 1:38 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 13:38
Sheesh.....NOBODY can keep a secret here!
Posted by Buffy | July 22, 2003 1:49 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 13:49
Thanks for the extra effort on that trapeze. I haven't been able to get the thought of "hot monkey sex" out of my head for two days now.
Posted by Sgt Hook | July 22, 2003 4:27 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 16:27
Ahhhhhhhhhhh (eyes lighting up) Mrs. Hook! I think you may have an exciting weekend coming up!
(rummaging around) I think I have a URL here somewhere for a ready made swing, if you don't have the time to fabricate one, Sarge! *G*
Posted by Buffy | July 22, 2003 4:40 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 16:40
Well, as you can see... we all seem to be homing in on the last line of your post.
So let me join in on the crowd in chanting WE WANT SEX! WE WANT SEX!
Posted by -=e=- | July 22, 2003 7:10 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 19:10
You still have sex??
(Sorry - my lame attempt at trolling . . . something my 14-year-old is excelling at this days.)
Love you, sissy, smooch, smooch . . .and all that crap. N
Posted by Nancy Franklin | July 22, 2003 7:52 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 19:52
(trying to ignore the fact that my little SISTER just joined the conversation) Sex??? WHO has sex??
Sorry -e-...I think you have the wrong blog! (Oh....thanks for being nice and not flaming me for all the trackback ineptness this morning. Be patient with me. I'm still a work in progress. T will confirm that.)
Posted by Buffy | July 22, 2003 8:02 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 20:02
Well Buffy ~ I'd join in the group about wanting sex, but knowing your memory, as I'm sure your sister can enjoy this comment, you'll have sex then forget about it just like you forgot about your kiss from Speedbump *laughing*!!! You are installing a trapaze for wild monkey sex???? Man YEAH BABY I want to play *no pun intended*
And I'm sorry ~ what image of purity??? Now that was comical!!!!
Posted by Jamie | July 22, 2003 10:45 PM
Posted on July 22, 2003 22:45
Buffy, if one wants to keep secrets, one shouldn't blog! LOL
Posted by Redeagle | July 23, 2003 1:14 AM
Posted on July 23, 2003 01:14
I can see it now.....I'll have to start wearing a black domino everywhere I go, so nobody recognizes me....
hmmmmmmmmm......Sissy.....do you still have that Merry Widow??? (mentally counting the weeks of diet I'd need to get into it)
Posted by Buffy | July 23, 2003 9:39 AM
Posted on July 23, 2003 09:39
I too want sex,will wait till the oppertunity with hubby comes up again. LOL... just noticed the pun that was not intended.
As for the troll thing... I was on for over a year when accused of trolling... I was just stating an opinion on a subject and the word troll gets thrown at me because I was not in sync with what the others in that audience were thinking. (freaking war issues). Well... I hope not to get mislabeled again. I am a person reading blogs and expressing an opinion in response to the content... if that is a troll, then some have applied a new meaning to the word.
Posted by Desiree | July 23, 2003 11:42 PM
Posted on July 23, 2003 23:42
btw.. the blog that occurred at was one that I visited regularily (more or less) and when I did not flower that person for their opinions but stated that I disagreed the sludge came out and cussed me down and called me a troll. Small minds should stick together I guess.
Posted by Desiree | July 23, 2003 11:49 PM
Posted on July 23, 2003 23:49
The usage has changed, at least a bit: it now refers to the type of critter that lives in dark damp places and if exposed to light utters an ear-piercing scream while throwing feces so as not to have to listen while his/her cave or bridge is demolished.
Desiree, the eedjut who called you a troll is one.
The entirety of Reuters is another -
*<a HREF="http://www.dailymail.com/news/Opinion/2003072434/">Dear Elizabeth: I didn't do it </a>*
---
This is from a story that Reuters news service ran this week with my byline:
"Jessica Lynch, the wounded Army private whose ordeal in Iraq was hyped into a media fiction of U.S. heroism, was set for an emotional homecoming on Tuesday . . . Media critics say the TV cameras will not show the return of an injured soldier so much as a reality-TV drama co-produced by U.S. government propaganda and credulous reporters."
Got problems with that?
I do, especially since I didn't write it.
---
Posted by John Anderson | July 24, 2003 6:19 PM
Posted on July 24, 2003 18:19
Desiree, that sucks! I guess you have to be thick skinned here, just like every other place on the 'net. I assume that it's difficult to become accepted in blogging circles as it can be in chat rooms, but that's no reason for rude behavior.
I hope hubby has had the opportunity to rise to the occasion! (pun intended) *G*
John.....I'm more than a little confused. Do you normally write for Reuters? Has a correction been issued for the error?
Posted by Buffy | July 25, 2003 12:34 PM
Posted on July 25, 2003 12:34