A matter of concern troll variation
Apr. 20th, 2010 11:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
narcasseI was about to write a post about the lack of civility seemingly inherent in online discourse and how this propensity to be a shit to other people, even perfect strangers, is a pretty good example, along with school playgrounds, that in the suspension of rules humanity really will do everything in their power to make life nasty, brutish and if possible short. And then I realised that my most recent example could be more easily described in a single phrase: concern troll.
There are quite complicated descriptions and elaborate examples of concern trolls about but this was a very basic one. This was a simple case where the concern troll had decided that a strongly held opinion meant that I obviously hadn’t thought the matter through, because if I had a strong opinion I couldn’t possibly have a reason for it. It doesn’t even make sense when viewed through the critical lens. A strong opinion, no matter what it is, tends to have a reason behind it. Perhaps the reason might be emotive rather than analytical or visa versa but these are still reasons, reasons so persuasive that the person who holds the opinion holds to it vehemently. For example, I have strong opinions about racism because a) I’m a decent human being, b) I’m a POC and c) it makes no rational sense. My sense of humanity is offended, my sensibilities as a POC are offended and my basic sense of rationalism is offended too. Thus this strong opinion of mine is the product of my thoughts, experiences and internal sense of rationalism. I feel this way strongly because I’ve thought about it, lived through it and critically examined the idea. And funnily enough for very similar reasons I have other strong opinions too.
Quite why strong opinions are subject to concern trolls becomes more apparent when you consider the reason why a strong opinion is held in the first place. The concern troll evidently realises at least subconsciously if not consciously as well that the person holding such an opinion has a reason for it so they have to find a way to undermine said opinion that doesn’t actually involve rational discussion. Usually it’s the tone argument, especially in race discussions because active racists are wising up to the fact that it’s not enough to just call us all a bunch of ‘darkies’ and tell us to shut our mouths anymore. The non-race discussion concern troll on the other hand seems to have adopted a slightly different tactic. Under the guise of discussion this manner of concern troll looks like they’re pointing out points you may have missed. Curiously they’re never addressing flaws in your actual arguments or how what you’ve focused on could be interpreted in a different light: the people who adopt that approach are usually the ones who are having a genuine discussion with you. The concern troll on the other hand makes it sound like they’re pointing out something pertinent to the discussion but aren’t because they are in fact talking about a point so wildly off topic and at least about five miles behind what you’re saying that it’s almost a non sequitur.
Considering the thread of logic that must have lead to your conclusion it’s always obvious that you must have addressed the concern troll’s points long before you reached the point of saying what you’ve said but by pushing the discussion backwards and making you go over your points again they’re attempting to distract you from your actual point. This way you get bogged down in going over the basic background leading up to the various factors that may eventually, somewhere far down the line, contribute to your actual point. And usually, if you do try to answer them honestly they’ll throw up so many simple arguments that have to be explained to them that you’ll run out of spoons long before you get to focus on your actual point. Though of course if you tell them that the point has already been addressed they’ll argue that it hasn’t because you refuse to go over it again for their benefit.
All of which is why once someone tries this line with me with that particularly obnoxious combination of patronising concern, since they don’t feel the need to address me in a civil fashion then likewise I have no reason to observe the usual social forms in returning fire. I’m perfectly within my rights to lambaste someone who doesn’t think that I’m deserving of even the barest respect. Why should I treat them civilly when they’ve demonstrated that they think I’m unworthy of civil address? The mechanics of such verbal combat are obvious and yet what surprises me most isn’t that such obnoxiously arrogant individuals exist but rather that they always seem to be more than a little stunned when I’m not receptive to their lack of civility. I could speculate that these people are evidently individuals who usually get away with their horrific behaviour in real life because everyone around them is stunned by how obnoxious they are and thus people are shocked into silence or try to make excuses for them which usually is the way of such things but it doesn’t excuse anything. It really does make me wonder about the state of society though but then, when it comes down to it, these obnoxious individuals aren’t in any way the majority. They’re not a trend: they’re an aberration because at the end of the day human societies manage to sustain themselves under the rules of Leviathan quite well, so I can only suppose that these are invalid offshoots. Either way, if they can’t control their dire behaviour online then I’d very much doubt that they can manage it offline forever and eventually they’re going to exhibit their rudeness in a situation where there will be consequences, where the subject of their incivility will be someone who can impact their future and one of these days that individual is going to be someone far crueller than I could ever be.
There are quite complicated descriptions and elaborate examples of concern trolls about but this was a very basic one. This was a simple case where the concern troll had decided that a strongly held opinion meant that I obviously hadn’t thought the matter through, because if I had a strong opinion I couldn’t possibly have a reason for it. It doesn’t even make sense when viewed through the critical lens. A strong opinion, no matter what it is, tends to have a reason behind it. Perhaps the reason might be emotive rather than analytical or visa versa but these are still reasons, reasons so persuasive that the person who holds the opinion holds to it vehemently. For example, I have strong opinions about racism because a) I’m a decent human being, b) I’m a POC and c) it makes no rational sense. My sense of humanity is offended, my sensibilities as a POC are offended and my basic sense of rationalism is offended too. Thus this strong opinion of mine is the product of my thoughts, experiences and internal sense of rationalism. I feel this way strongly because I’ve thought about it, lived through it and critically examined the idea. And funnily enough for very similar reasons I have other strong opinions too.
Quite why strong opinions are subject to concern trolls becomes more apparent when you consider the reason why a strong opinion is held in the first place. The concern troll evidently realises at least subconsciously if not consciously as well that the person holding such an opinion has a reason for it so they have to find a way to undermine said opinion that doesn’t actually involve rational discussion. Usually it’s the tone argument, especially in race discussions because active racists are wising up to the fact that it’s not enough to just call us all a bunch of ‘darkies’ and tell us to shut our mouths anymore. The non-race discussion concern troll on the other hand seems to have adopted a slightly different tactic. Under the guise of discussion this manner of concern troll looks like they’re pointing out points you may have missed. Curiously they’re never addressing flaws in your actual arguments or how what you’ve focused on could be interpreted in a different light: the people who adopt that approach are usually the ones who are having a genuine discussion with you. The concern troll on the other hand makes it sound like they’re pointing out something pertinent to the discussion but aren’t because they are in fact talking about a point so wildly off topic and at least about five miles behind what you’re saying that it’s almost a non sequitur.
Considering the thread of logic that must have lead to your conclusion it’s always obvious that you must have addressed the concern troll’s points long before you reached the point of saying what you’ve said but by pushing the discussion backwards and making you go over your points again they’re attempting to distract you from your actual point. This way you get bogged down in going over the basic background leading up to the various factors that may eventually, somewhere far down the line, contribute to your actual point. And usually, if you do try to answer them honestly they’ll throw up so many simple arguments that have to be explained to them that you’ll run out of spoons long before you get to focus on your actual point. Though of course if you tell them that the point has already been addressed they’ll argue that it hasn’t because you refuse to go over it again for their benefit.
All of which is why once someone tries this line with me with that particularly obnoxious combination of patronising concern, since they don’t feel the need to address me in a civil fashion then likewise I have no reason to observe the usual social forms in returning fire. I’m perfectly within my rights to lambaste someone who doesn’t think that I’m deserving of even the barest respect. Why should I treat them civilly when they’ve demonstrated that they think I’m unworthy of civil address? The mechanics of such verbal combat are obvious and yet what surprises me most isn’t that such obnoxiously arrogant individuals exist but rather that they always seem to be more than a little stunned when I’m not receptive to their lack of civility. I could speculate that these people are evidently individuals who usually get away with their horrific behaviour in real life because everyone around them is stunned by how obnoxious they are and thus people are shocked into silence or try to make excuses for them which usually is the way of such things but it doesn’t excuse anything. It really does make me wonder about the state of society though but then, when it comes down to it, these obnoxious individuals aren’t in any way the majority. They’re not a trend: they’re an aberration because at the end of the day human societies manage to sustain themselves under the rules of Leviathan quite well, so I can only suppose that these are invalid offshoots. Either way, if they can’t control their dire behaviour online then I’d very much doubt that they can manage it offline forever and eventually they’re going to exhibit their rudeness in a situation where there will be consequences, where the subject of their incivility will be someone who can impact their future and one of these days that individual is going to be someone far crueller than I could ever be.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2010-04-21 09:35 am (UTC)The troll's constant effort to seek pride from coming off as a "winner" in any discussion he get into, and my equally awfull pride that makes me put more effort than I should into "winning" the match with points and counterpoints just to punish them for their stupidity and arrogance. The reson why I insist in helding a very civil and playfull sometimes profile in such discussions is just because it's the only way I can make them feel frustrated. Awfull truth is awfull.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-04-23 01:56 pm (UTC)Having looked a little more into the incident I used as an example I suspect that it was an issue of said individual having poor English and Japanese themselves so somehow to their mind defending poor translations was shoring up their own pretension to being skilled in either language.
(no subject)
Date: 2010-04-23 03:18 pm (UTC)Ah, I see... probably, that guy also wanted to mantain his *reputation* .. amatorial translators do that quite often: cream their translation with their interpretations and got as offended as if you'd tap the ass of their mothers if you dare point out any inconsistency. ° °
(no subject)
Date: 2010-04-26 03:32 pm (UTC)The odd part is that if they hadn’t argued their poor work ethics/bad translations/bad English point at all I’d still be under the impression that the LJ Trinity Blood novel translation project was slow but accurate: I was criticising TokyoPop’s novel translations after all.