General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Trollware on mha, an analysis

Started by Henry · · Last activity · 3 posts · 275 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
20 May 2004
Last activity
21 May 2004
Original author
Henry
Posts
3
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
275
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–3 of 3
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Fascinating, isn't it? A tiny group of people, each irrevocably set in
    his/her/its ways - utterly immovable - arguing with each other, saying
    things and assuming postures that would be utterly unacceptable to their
    personae in, for example, a cocktail party. For trolls, sociologists, and
    psychologists it's incredibly fertile ground. Introduce any stimulus and it
    quickly evolves into predictable personal attacks. I introduced two original
    posts: [Why alternative medicine "works"] & ["lies" vs. "errors"]. Responses
    quickly resolved into two groups:

    1. Proponents and skeptics of alternative medicine
    2. Personal attacks that have nothing to do with the topic

    It's my observation that the responses to my posts are typical of responses
    to most original posts on mha. After three or four rational responses in
    category #1 the topic is exhausted, but #2 often descends into vicious
    territory, and even after dozens of off-topic posts many of these threads
    have life to them. People here spend enormous energy on google and
    elsewhere, looking back to substantiate their claims and arguments, seeking
    evidence, doing research to prove that so-and-so lied or deceived. The
    attacks and counterattacks degrade into the nasty and personal. Casual
    visitors here might click on a few of these threads and instead of posting
    their question or observation, immediately move on to more rational (and
    safer!) discussion - on Yahoo, as an example.

    If a visitor came by carrying a wonderful pearl of information that you
    would love to see, it would probably be dropped elsewhere...

    No wonder the population here is so small.

    Re-nanosabbaticalizing...

  2. self admitting TROLL !

    "Henry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Fascinating, isn't it? A tiny group of people, each irrevocably set in
    his/her/its ways - utterly immovable - arguing with each other, saying
    things and assuming postures that would be utterly unacceptable to their

  3. "Henry" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    It's my observation that the responses to my posts are typical of


    responses

    Quoted message said:

    to most original posts on mha. After three or four rational responses in
    category #1 the topic is exhausted, but #2 often descends into vicious
    territory, and even after dozens of off-topic posts many of these threads
    have life to them.

    This is atypical of a high percentage of threads, also if you notice there's
    groups of posters who appear with each other.
    This kind of hints at the fact they are networked.

    Quoted message said:

    If a visitor came by carrying a wonderful pearl of information that you
    would love to see, it would probably be dropped elsewhere...

    No wonder the population here is so small.

    Re-nanosabbaticalizing...

    Anth

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.