fdisk wrote:
 | ScanIAm wrote:I kind of agree, though. I think we should save the troll comments for the really talented trolls.
We can just continue to assume the rest are alts for Beer28. |
Whoa...how did you come to that conclusion? I've seen some pretty "talented" trolls here but I doubt they are all by the same person.
Besides, I don't even think Jamie's post was a "troll"...I think it just hit a raw nerve with Rory, and the two should sit down and talk it out over a few brews.
I think you're probably right.
I felt that Jamie's post attacked more than it helped (don't know if that makes sense, but that's the thought that came out of my head).
And it *did* hit a nerve. One of the things I dealt with when on the road and going up in front of customers was *constantly* being told things like, "Yeah, well, I switched to FIREFOX" - this, always followed by an intense glare as though I was being challenged.
Now I have little patience for the Firefox-is-soooooo-much-better camp. I have no problems whatsoever with the opinion - everybody's entitled, of course - but I happen to *like* IE7, and when someone states that IE7 is, as a matter of *fact*, not any good, then, yeah, it rubs me the wrong way.
I called Jamie's post a troll because it seemed to me that he was trolling.
Regarding the question of what is/isn't a troll, everybody needs to remember that troll does *not* refer to those mythological creatures who live under bridges and like to club people. Rather, it's the verb which refers to fishing by cruising around with your baited line dragging behind the boat.
It did eventually come about that the people who regularly did this were referred to as "trolls," but the act of trolling itself is something distinct from the person - that's why it's possible to say that Jamie is *not* a troll, but that Jamie *was* trolling.
This is rather nitpicky, but there you go.