[wott]

Pre- or beside-Internet, the days of FidoNet; the days of Usenet before its decadence; the days before Web 2.0; the days before business shifted from traditional forms to Internet; the days before smartphones, etc.

There's no clear point, but when it was loosely "reserved" to a certain "elite" (financial, technical, cultural, scientific) which showed genuine interest in it, it was in a much better condition than now. It sounds terrible to say that, but as the masses joined in, the media dumbed down and what it carries dumbed down as well. Another step towards dumbness happened when kids were massively allowed to enter the arena. Again, this sounds harsh, but that's the pitiful reality of humankind. And businesses and capitalism know very well how to encourage the most vile behaviours in order to make more profit.

It also shifted from a confidence & collaboration mode to insecurity & defiance. Now it's "oh my God how this protocol / library is insecure, how could one design such a stupid thing?" Well, I am not sure who is most stupid.

Remember when a 'troll' was just someone who was just pulling a prank teasing a few other people? Well now the same word means a stupid, racist, hateful, mean guy who drowns out a forum or a site with his feces and whose attacks impact real life of its victims.

Which brings me to tell that another big difference is that when Internet was disconnected from real life, it was much better. That was a big turning point too. You used to be able to write everything under your real name and not fear some acquaintance, school mate, employer or any other peeping Tom or enemy would search for it.

So there's not a single year to point out, but during the last 15 (20?) years a series of steps gradually turned Internet in the shithole (and supermarket) it is now. And none of those steps was positive.

[pjc50]

The first time I got called a "troll" because someone disagreed with my criticism of a computer program was on FidoNet. That was probably over 20 years ago.

I'm not sure it's got worse intrinsically, but it has certainly got larger, so the badness has scaled along with it.

[mgkimsal]

You're on to something, but even if the 'badness' on an individual basis is the same as 20 years ago, the volume has gone up more than linearly. As more people have joined and been able to find other like-minded folks, they've become emboldened to contribute more. And I don't think this has just happened in 'bad' communities - I've seen it happen in all sorts of communities - people connecting to other folks online has seemed to have this multiplier effect all over.

[vivekd]

I think a big part of it is anonymity encourages people to let out the worst aspects of their personality. I think if a forum required people to use their real identities you would see much less objectionable contact (but probably also a lot less interesting ideas)

[pjc50]

No, you'd see (as with youtube and G+) people putting out objectionable content under their own names. While genuinely vulnerable people would tend not to get involved for their own safety.

The problem is one of "lawlessness"; adhoc reprisals from your fellow netizens aren't an improvement.