[DictumExNihilo]

What if most of them aren't "trolls" at all, but rather people who have something to say that is important to them and they choose a method to say it that upsets some people?

The base assumption is that many of them are old-school variety: they seek disruption for its own sake. Suppose for a moment that this base assumption should not be taken as axiomatic. What else might motivate such a person? Some of you are quick to jump to the conclusion that money is the only other motivation. But money isn't what motivates everyone. Lots of people create art, for example, and receive little to no money for what they do.

What if some people are trying to motivate others to think about the things they believe, say, and do? Their medium need not be literature, paintings, music, sculpture, and so forth. A sarcastic tongue can teach too. It can spread ideas and challenge assumptions. Writing a lengthy essay that nobody will read may be a counterproductive use of time.

People roll their eyes if one brings up philosophy in a casual setting. I see a lot of things people call "trolling" as small performances of philosophy. Not all of them are effective, virtuous, or well-informed. But some are. The ones that really get under our skin are the ones who actually understand us the best, they know our weaknesses and exploit them. There is too much focus on who they are and whether or not they're getting paid (because they probably aren't) and not enough on what is being said. In a lot of cases, what isn't said is just as important. If the "troll" wants you to think about your own positions, he may just omit several critical details on purpose and let you fill in the blanks.

Diogenes didn't make people happy when he walked about in broad daylight with a lantern looking for "an honest man", he made some of them laugh, and made others angry. Socrates made enemies by arguing with people and showing them that they didn't really know why they believed as they did. I've had more productive conversations with people in my life when I took an adversarial position to them under the veil of anonymity, even though I agreed with their position. If I can argue a position I don't agree with and hold my own, the other guy comes out of it with new ammunition to defeat it too (or more ambition to find some), and they often teach me a few tricks along the way.

It is entirely too easy to dismiss a person if all you think they want is to make you mad with what they've said.

[st3v3r]

"What if most of them aren't "trolls" at all, but rather people who have something to say that is important to them and they choose a method to say it that upsets some people?"

If the only way you can express your dislike of a black actress is to compare her to an ape, maybe just shut the fuck up.

"It is entirely too easy to dismiss a person if all you think they want is to make you mad with what they've said."

And it's entirely too easy to ignore the problem of real trolling and harassment if you think it's just people with "differing opinions".

[DictumExNihilo]

>If the only way you can express your dislike of a black actress is to compare her to an ape, maybe just shut the fuck up.

??? You got me, yes, this is exactly what I do. There's a secret Nazi hiding in every bush and behind every corner ready to pounce and I'm part of the great Internet conspiracy of secret Nazis.

>And it's entirely too easy to ignore the problem of real trolling and harassment if you think it's just people with "differing opinions".

Harassment is totally the same thing. And if a hundred people show up to make fun of the dumb thing you said, it was an organized conspiracy to hurt your feelings and not myopia about potentially millions of people who normally see stuff and don't interact with it until it's too dumb to ignore.

If you've got people sending you death threats or violating TOS of sites, obviously report them. If they say rude things that have absolutely no value at all, ignore them. But if they're actually trying to pick an argument with you in good faith, they may not be a "troll" after all. There's FAR too much where people have slid into thinking that anyone who has a different opinion and expresses it in an unpleasant way is out to "troll" or "harass" them.

I mean, look, you just attacked me, a complete stranger, who has never done any of the things you brought up because I dare suggest that some belief you hold is wrong. How's that for proving a point?