esoteriic.com

With a contentious title like that you're bound to read this article. Of course if you have no idea what trolling is then you won't be any the wiser at the moment. To gain an understanding of what trolling is and why it is an interesting topic then review the NY Times article.

Having an insight into a trolls mind may seem like an insight into the mind of an obscure deranged madman but history could argue that trolling is not exclusive to madmen.

What is Trolling?

The opening picture to that article has the following caption:

"The Trolls Among Us: Weev (not, of course, his real name) is part of a growing Internet subculture with a fluid morality and a disdain for pretty much everyone else online."

From the letters page in response to the above article, one person writes:

"This is the first I’ve learned of an online community whose primary mission is to dispense negativity and pain. I was especially intrigued by the twisted justification offered by many of these individuals, who claim they are providing a benefit in exposing the failings of others or the weaknesses of various sites."

Understanding trolls

So if you didn't read the article and did not previously know what trolling is about then you ought to have a good idea now. Trolling is essentially dispensing negativity for one's own enjoyment. Why do people do this? I find this topic as interesting as the Milgram experiment; both give an insight into the human mind and suggest what humans are capable of in both 'normal' and 'abnormal' circumstances (no definition of normal given ;-) ). The concept of absolute morality or of an absolute values system is challenged on the internet. In this era of increased connectivity (hyper-connectivity) between people with larger networks of friends (and ultimately more fame) the notions of what is and is not acceptable may no longer apply. Of course anonymity on the internet helps trolls to 'get away with it' but ultimately it doesn't make them do what they do. To explain such people (trolls) should we:

(1) blame a lack of education or intelligence? That doesn't seem to apply to all cases of trolls.

(2) blame the government for allowing society to degenerate such that trolls are product of this society? Essentially this rhetoric is suggesting that trolls didn't exist in previous societies hence there must be something wrong with the present society. This also seems like an unsatisfactory question and answer.

or,

(3) believe that such behaviour has always existed but is only more prominent to us because (i) trolls of history are now dead (don't affect us and (ii) it is an emergent property of a hyper-connected human system.

My position is going to be a combination of all three points; some people are just stupid, give them anonymity and place to express themself (youtube) and stupidity ensues. These people are accidental trolls: a combination of adolescent behaviour and terrible communication culminates in the sort of comments that are typical of youtube: "FU NOOB!1". Consequences are never fully considered and the impact of the troll is minimal.

Then we have to look at people that willfully cause disruption and spread negativity AND understand the consequences. The scale of the troll is much larger, not just restricted to one website like youtube but could be across many sites and also offline. These people tend to be educated, which negates point (1) but, is a combination of (2) and (3). Something in their life upsets them so their outlet for such pain manifests itself as inflicting pain upon others as a way of balancing how they feel: "If I must suffer then so must someone else." Some of which could be personal reasons that are independent of era in history, eg abused/neglected/lacking something as child and on top of that there could be something in society that perpetuates negative thoughts and encourages us to lash out. The latter is also independent of time. It could have happened at any point in history. A certain person or group of people feel oppressed (they suffer) so they inflict suffering upon others in order to obtain enjoyment.

However the modern society is different from previous eras in many ways (another discussion in itself), a consequence of that is the nature in which troll-like nature will manifest itself. Laughing at someone that died is not a new concept but making an internet meme that mocks someone who died is new. Technology has changed the way we troll. With the advent of the internet we have hyper-connectivity that allows for new avenues of trolldom. Furthermore, aside from trolling, I believe that such hyper-connectivity amongst a human network will lead to a new type of group (mass/herd) behaviour that is a new emergent property of this society. We already know that humans act different as individuals and as part of a mass, and as the number of people increases then the behaviour may change from one type to another. Again, I'll stress that the internet allows for not only an increased number of connections among people but the size of connection has also increased: people can share more of their creations than before and in a shorter space of time.

The consequence of hyper-connectivity is that new patterns in herd behaviour among humans (and probably other species too if they could use the net) will arise. If we were to imagine ourselves as telepathic then consider the increase in connectivity that would bring to humans as a whole. Nothing would be hidden and new patterns in behaviour would emerge. Telepathy does not require magic but rather a sufficient advancement in technology. Something such as the matrix as seen in Neuromancer (or that well known plagiarised film) is a step towards the final (?) state in hyper-connectivity: telepathy.