Study: Online Trolls Tend to Be Sadistic

Here’s the most unsurprising study result you’ll see this week (month…year…decade). A new study published in a psychology journal concludes that online trolling correlates with sadism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism. Here’s the abstract:

In two online studies (total N = 1215), respondents completed personality inventories and a survey of their Internet commenting styles. Overall, strong positive associations emerged among online commenting frequency, trolling enjoyment, and troll identity, pointing to a common construct underlying the measures. Both studies revealed similar patterns of relations between trolling and the Dark Tetrad of personality: trolling correlated positively with sadism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, using both enjoyment ratings and identity scores. Of all personality measures, sadism showed the most robust associations with trolling and, importantly, the relationship was specific to trolling behavior. Enjoyment of other online activities, such as chatting and debating, was unrelated to sadism. Thus cyber-trolling appears to be an Internet manifestation of everyday sadism.

Caitlin Dewey responds to the study:

But the intriguing thing about this new study by researchers from University of Manitoba, University of Winnipeg and University of British Columbia is the idea that trolling behavior springs not from the opportunity provided by the Internet, but from innate characteristics people possess both online and off.

That bodes poorly for efforts to tame the trolls. It also suggests, somewhat ominously, that there are lots of “everyday sadists among us.”

Of course there are. The anonymity and distance of online communication provides the opportunity for them to show their true nature in ways that they cannot do in their everyday life. I have always maintained that there’s nothing fake about this kind of thing. If you spend your time acting like an asshole online, you are an asshole.

"I think it's pretty obvious that Pence is already de facto president, has been since ..."

Looks Like Flynn Has Flipped on ..."
"No can do, er, bonobo. The only guarantee is that they are sinfully delicious. Even ..."

AL Cop: We Were Told to ..."
"Heeeey . . . that gives me a great idea!I'll put a cherry on top!Mmmmm! ..."

AL Cop: We Were Told to ..."
"Pure is for water and heroin. When it comes to women a lack of purity ..."

Pastor: Moore Liked Young Girls Because ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • otrame

    If you spend your time acting like an asshole online, you are an asshole.

    QFT. Because:

    We are what we pretend to be, so we should be very careful what we pretend to be.–Kurt Vonnegut

  • http://onhandcomments.blogspot.com/ left0ver1under

    I don’t disagree with the last sentence, not one iota. However, how many online jerks don’t act like that in person because there are consequences? How many become “brave” because of distance and anonymity? But I suspect the number of online jerks is larger than offline because they’re cowards.

    It’s easy for a yappy dog to bark out a window at passersby, inside the safety of a house. Some may be just as vicious outside, but some turn tail and run from those they barked at from a distance.

  • Sastra

    Does anyone know how the study defined “trolling?” I tried to look but you have to pay.

    I know how it’s usually defined — and there are several ways. I’m curious about the specific one they used.

  • kosk11348

    Lol, otrame. I just looked up that Vonnegut quote and was about to post it myself. Very apt indeed.

  • Trebuchet

    …online trolling correlates with sadism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism.

    So apparently trolls are just CEO’s without Harvard MBA’s.

  • http://cheapsignals.blogspot.com Gretchen

    . I have always maintained that there’s nothing fake about this kind of thing. If you spend your time acting like an asshole online, you are an asshole.

    This is not only true but hazardous to misunderstand, and trolls often misunderstand it. The biggest assholes online tend to be the people who think that “online” means “not real.” That the people they’re terrorizing aren’t actually people, because they don’t necessarily have a face, voice, or real name to access.

    That cartoon about how if you take a normal person and give them anonymity and the internet, you create a troll….false. Internet trolls are “real life” assholes. If you can’t see them being assholes in “real life,” that’s just because they’re cowards as well.

  • vmanis1

    I’m not arguing with their conclusions, but I wonder how many trollers aren’t `sadistic’ so much as lonely individuals who simply can’t relate, and thus use the aforementioned anonymity as a cover with which they can lash out. I’m relying on the extensive research that seems to indicate that being bullied often causes a person to become a bully.

    As a non-expert in the field, I would speculate that just as there isn’t one kind of trolling, there isn’t one kind of troll.

  • Jordan Genso

    What does that say about poe trolls? I would think that MadTheSwine (from a while back) would be a counterpoint to the “you are what you pretend to be” conclusion. Modusoperandi and Stephen Colbert would be other examples.

  • http://flewellyn.livejournal.com Flewellyn

    I think the “trolling” in question here is the type where someone simply hurls abuse at others. As opposed to the kind where you, say, post a clever satire of something, or engage in surreal but non-abusive behavior for the purpose of eliciting amused and bemused reactions.

    The abusive kind of trolling is undertaken by abusive people. Shocking result.

    The popular belief that abusive trolls are normal people who just get disinhibited online, is often known as the “Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory”, so-named by a comic from Penny Arcade. Considering the source, this strikes me as evidence of GIFT believer’s desire to promote the idea, more than as evidence of the idea being valid; after all, we are talking about the same two guys who pushed the “Dickwolves” business from a simple mistake into a flaming vortex of assholishness.

  • Reginald Selkirk

    Sastra #3: Does anyone know how the study defined “trolling?”

    I don’t know, but they seem to distinguish between trolling and debating.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Jordan Genso, the study concluded that Poes are way better then you thought they were back when you were little, best served steamed and covered in melted cheese, and are an excellent source of Vitamin C. They’re the broccoli of the internet.

  • D. C. Sessions

    Jordan Genso:

    There’s a big difference between parody and trolling. Trolling depends on being taken at face value, whereas parody depends on being understood to be making the exact opposite point.

    A Poe (and I’ve been Poe at times in my life [1]) skirts the edge. Well, that’s by definition. But it’s a shared joke. It’s not like we don’t know that Colbert’s whole schtick is done for laughs, and Modus gets serious often enough that you have to be pretty thick or pretty new to miss the joke.

    [1] Check “overshoot” on the old Daily Beast Frum forum.

  • Reginald Selkirk

    It’s not like we don’t know that Colbert’s whole schtick is done for laughs

    I worry about Colbert sometimes. He could be setting himself up for a massive case of Stockholm syndrome.

  • raven

    I learned a lot about what online people can be like in real life, long ago.

    Back in the Dark Ages it was common for people to use their real names. On one forum, one of the participants was obviously having some sort of real life problems. Then he disappeared.

    A few weeks later, someone else posted a short newspaper article. He had been killed in a shootout with the police during an inept daylight robbery.

    What you see is what you get.

  • doublereed

    Isn’t this kind of an odd thing to criticize about considering the sheer amount of schadenfreude on this very blog? I mean just the other day you were commending those people who trolled that anti-gay restuarant into reviewing it as the best place for gay hookups or whatever.

    I mean sadomasochism is a real human tendency. There’s just a time and a place for it.

  • Jordan Genso

    Yeah, my comment was mostly in jest, to help illustrate that not all trolls are the same (which is something we all already knew).

    They’re the broccoli of the internet.

    I’ll let my nutritionist know that I watch the Colbert Report during dinner then, so I can skip my greens.

  • http://reasondecrystallized.blogspot.com andrew

    Interesting in the implication that social consequences for IRL bad behavior are holding people in check, only for the tendencies to come out once internet anonymity removes those consequences.

    Thus, /b/, basically.

  • http://cheapsignals.blogspot.com Gretchen

    Flewellyn said:

    The popular belief that abusive trolls are normal people who just get disinhibited online, is often known as the “Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory”, so-named by a comic from Penny Arcade. Considering the source, this strikes me as evidence of GIFT believer’s desire to promote the idea, more than as evidence of the idea being valid; after all, we are talking about the same two guys who pushed the “Dickwolves” business from a simple mistake into a flaming vortex of assholishness.

    Yes, that’s the comic I was thinking of– I’d totally forgotten the source. And yes, I believe you’ve correct in your assessment of it.

  • dave

    A more accurate headline might be, “Mechanical Turk workers who admit to pointless destructive behavior are sadists.” But I suppose that wouldnt be as eye catching.

    The study was based on a survey, so this isnt judging by peoples actual behavior, but rather by what they will admit in a survey. Survey participants were recruited through Mechanical Turk, so no exactly a random sample of Internet users. And trolling was defined as “the practice of behaving in a deceptive, destructive, or disruptive manner in a social setting on the Internet with no apparent instrumental purpose,” contrary to that definition, many people labeled trolls believe they are acting with a purpose.

  • David C Brayton

    I think the same way about alcohol: If you’re an asshole only when drunk, you’re still an asshole.

  • lofgren

    I think the same way about alcohol: If you’re an asshole only when drunk, you’re still an asshole.

    I disagree with that one. Personally I don’t buy that “in vino veritas.” Being an asshole under the influence of some chemical doesn’t mean that you’re an asshole. It means you shouldn’t use that chemical as much. Lower the right inhibitions and most people will turn into assholes.

  • Scr… Archivist

    Sastra @3,

    Skimming the paper, it seems that they simply asked people to self-report from among multiple choices of online activities. Some of the options actually used the verb “troll”, which tells me that the investigators were leaving the interpretation of the word up to the study participants. “The key questions regarding trolling and other online behaviors were embedded in a larger battery of personality questionnaires.”

    In Study 1 , they started by measuring where the subjects fell on the Short Sadistic Impulse Scale and the Varieties of Sadistic Tendencies scale. They also assessed the 44-item Big Five Inventory and the 27-item Short Dark Triad scale. Then they got to the heart of the matter.

    Finally, the section on Internet behavior asked participants to estimate their overall commenting frequency: ‘‘How many hours per day do you spend posting comments on websites (e.g., YouTube, news sites, forums, etc.)?’’ A second question probed their preferred activity when commenting online: ‘‘What do you enjoy doing most on these comment sites?’’ with five response options: ‘‘debating issues that are important to you’’, ‘‘chatting with other users’’, ‘‘making new friends’’, ‘‘trolling other users’’, and ‘‘other (specify)’’. The order of the first four answer options was randomized.

    In Study 2, they attached scales to each of the activity to see how much people enjoyed those activities. This study also had a larger and more diverse sample, according to the paper. It measured the Big Five Inventory, and the Short Dark Triad scale again. But this time they used the 18-item Comprehensive Assessment of Sadistic Tendencies.

    They asked subjects about some basic Internet usage stats, then:

    We also included four items relevant to trolling that were interspersed in the other measures: ‘‘I have sent people to shock websites for the lulz’’, ‘‘I like to troll people in forums or the comments section of websites’’, ‘‘I enjoy griefing other players in multiplayer games’’, and ‘‘The more beautiful and pure a thing is, the more satisfying it is to corrupt’’, 4 rated on 5-point scales from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The first three items addressed trolling experience and enjoying various forms of trolling, while the last item addressed identification with trolling and Internet subcultures. Mean responses to these four items (a = .82) formed the composite score labeled, Global Assessment of Internet Trolling (GAIT).

    I hope that helps.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    Why do they feel so negatively about Renaissance Florentine secularist politicians?

  • Sastra

    @Scr… Archivist:

    Yes, thanks — that helps answer my question.

    I think there are going to be some problems with people being allowed to define “trolling” for themselves, but at least the people who did the survey seemed somewhat concerned with trying to eliminate some of the outlying definitions.

    When I first got on the internet back in the early 90’s (I had to light the pilot light on my computer), a “troll” was someone who was playacting a role. They would take positions they didn’t hold — or pretend to be what they were not — to stir people up or to see if they could successfully “pass.” It didn’t have to be malicious and many trolls were never outed. You could wonder whether or not the 45 year old expert on aviation was really a 15 year old “troll” who loved airplanes.

    The general meaning has changed. Trolls were always annoying, but not necessarily annoying. That is, you were bothered to find out that the Catholic theologian with the Phd you’d been arguing with for the last several weeks was really just another atheist seeing if they could do Aquinas, but they had always been formally polite (which helped fool you.)

  • caseloweraz

    Both studies revealed similar patterns of relations between trolling and the Dark Tetrad of personality: trolling correlated positively with sadism, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism, using both enjoyment ratings and identity scores.

    Um, Dark Tetrad? Methinks it should be “Dark Triad” since I see only three traits enumerated. And I’ll echo Pierce Butler’s question. Macchiavelli is more admired than abhorred, in my experience.

  • abear

    I’m with Pierce R. Butler and caseloweraz about Machiavelli.

    Also the definition of troll will vary from person to person . Some internet people will accuse someone that simply disagrees with them as being a harassing troll.

    Trolls are far from being alone in engaging in assholish behavior. Check out bloggers like the Brietbart crew,Glen Beck and PZ Meyers, various youtubers, forums, etc.; the internet is rife with assholery.

    As far as the sadism and psychopathy, I don’t know about what fraction of “trolls” they are talking about but it sounds like drawing a bit of a long bow.

  • Azkyroth Drinked the Grammar Too :)

    Isn’t this kind of an odd thing to criticize about considering the sheer amount of schadenfreude on this very blog? I mean just the other day you were commending those people who trolled that anti-gay restuarant into reviewing it as the best place for gay hookups or whatever.

    I mean sadomasochism is a real human tendency. There’s just a time and a place for it.

    Are you fucking seriously conflating the desire to see people who behave in harmful ways, especially when they’re arrogant about it, face consequences for it, with “sadism?”

  • leni

    Then I guess how we deal with every day sadists in meatspace is probably not so far from how we should deal with them online.

    I don’t know what that is because I’m not a psychologist. I have some guesses, though. None of which involve a lot of hand-wringing over their free speech rights. In my own life, the one or two people I’ve met that I think would score pretty highly on the dark triad or tetrad or whatever it is, I don’t invite those people into my home. I don’t invite them into my friends’ homes, I don’t ask them to pet-sit for me and I don’t give a shit about their right to free speech in my personal space. And yes, I warn other people about them.

    If I had a website I don’t think I’d do much hand wringing about applying those same general policies. I think the technical term for this is Futue te quoque*, but perhaps Dr. X (if he isn’t just a 15 year old psychology enthusiast!) could provide some actual insight.

    Mostly I just don’t care how someone personally defines troll if they 1) call themselves a troll and 2) have self-reported behaviors that correlate positively with the psychological traits that correlate positively with being a huge asshole. Good enough for them, good enough for me.

    In closing, Modus look at you scoring troll points with Colbert! Good work! Also, you managed to do it without ever once coming off like a sado, so you should probably get bonus stealth troll points. Troll Santa is going to need some mad SQL skills though. You has some serious competition.

    * I just spent like 30 minutes googling how to say “fuck you too” in Latin and I’m certain this is wildly wrong but I’m leaving it because it made me laugh the most.

  • doublereed

    @27 yes of course

    besides, the example I gave was an example of trolling, not sadism

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Thinking of internet pyschology this post on Jim Wright’s Stonekettle Station blog :

    http://www.stonekettle.com/2014/02/defensive-wounds.html

    makes very interesting and impressive reading as do many of the comments there.

    Certainly shades of some commenters on Pharyngula among other places on FTB there.

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Something from the comments there that I think we all need to consider and note :

    “Any time people lead with the assumption that the other person is an asshole, they’re extremely likely to interpret everything wrong.”

    This rings very true for a lot of those commenting on FTB and especially for Pharyngula and from my specific experience of it.

    People have and still do literally pre-judge me based on their own false impressions created by slanders from a few idiots who’ve misunderstood some of the things I said long ago and thus they now misinterpret whether consciously and willfully or subconsciously without realising it everything I now type and imagine the worst possible meanings into it. Which makes their (mis~)readings automatically wrong and means they fail to understand and grasp what I’m actually saying and fail to respond in a reasonable or fair manner.

    Note that just because somebody may come from a priviledged background (or, this being the internet they might equally be a dog!) doesn’t make their arguments illogical or wrong and the evidence and reasoning they put forward can still be completely valid.

    Just because someone disagrees with some people here on some issues doesn’t make them a bad person or unethical or a troll as those who disagree often get labelled here. Its quite possible for good and intelligent people to come to different opinions and conclusions on things.

    ‘Priviledge’ (in the Social Justice FTB sense of the word not its conventional english meaning) is an idea which has some truth in it – but also is irrelevant when it comes to what really matters logic and scientific evidence.

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    @1. otrame :

    ..QFT. Because:

    “We are what we pretend to be, so we should be very careful what we pretend to be.–Kurt Vonnegut.

    I like to pretend I’m the President of Pluto therefore … I am?

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    @22. Scr… Archivist & #19. dave : Thanks for those comments – very informative and appreciated.

  • http://www.ranum.com Marcus Ranum

    People have and still do literally pre-judge me based on their own false impressions created by slanders from a few idiots who’ve misunderstood some of the things I said long ago

    You mean like the dumbass comment you dropped in the license plate thread less than an hour ago?

    The impression you’re an asshole would probably fade if you weren’t doing such a great job of constantly reinforcing it.

  • http://www.ranum.com Marcus Ranum

    Ah, if the questionnaire uses terms like “lulz” “troll” and “griefing” aren’t they framing the question using language that’s common to some trolling subcultures?

    I’m also a bit concerned at the use of “machiavellian” – it’s a bit more complicated than just “manipulative”, “amoral” or “moral relativist” which is what they appear to be using it as a stand-in for. Some people who see the term are going to think it’s a negative term, others might identify positively with it.

    What the hell is “everyday sadism”? Sadism is a sexual paraphilia – it’s not an ‘everyday’ thing and I’ve encountered lots of people in my life who self-describe as “sadists” but who are not. Obviously, it’s a matter of degree but … being the kind of person who enjoys making someone else’s blood pressure spike does not make one a “sadist”.

    Self-reporting against vague terms bothers me, but that’s a general problem in the social sciences and it’s one reason I tend to be a bit dismissive of papers like this; it seems to boil down to “people who self-describe as assholes, seem to actually act like they think assholes act.” If I’m a self-identified “griefer” I’m likely to “grief” but that doesn’t mean that my idea of “griefing” and your idea of “griefing” bear any resemblance to eachother beyond the initial letter ‘G’.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    I’ve never defined trolls as being, only, abusive. I’ve always thought of them as the jerks who come into threads with no agenda except pushing whatever pet meme they have a hard-on about or simply disrupting other conversation/debate. I’ve encountered numerous trolls who never swear or use “uncivilized” language–they’re still lying sacks-of-shit and deserve no respect or anything other than derision.

    leni:

    This:

    Futue te ipsum!

    is from here: http://nawcom.com/swearing/latin.htm

  • anteprepro

    People have and still do literally pre-judge me based on their own false impressions created by slanders from a few idiots who’ve misunderstood some of the things I said long ago and thus they now misinterpret whether consciously and willfully or subconsciously without realising it everything I now type and imagine the worst possible meanings into it. Which makes their (mis~)readings automatically wrong and means they fail to understand and grasp what I’m actually saying and fail to respond in a reasonable or fair manner.

    What a crock of shit. The sad part is that you might be able to fool people into thinking you are right about this. You were not pre-judged: you were just judged. Accurately. And now you are going to scamper away to other blogs, whining and playing victim, with audiences that have no idea what actually went on and thus might actually believe your delusional complaints are truthful.

    Note that just because somebody may come from a priviledged background (or, this being the internet they might equally be a dog!) doesn’t make their arguments illogical or wrong and the evidence and reasoning they put forward can still be completely valid.

    It’s a matter of perspective. And if we are talking about the life experiences of an underprivileged group, than someone who is privileged chiming in to say “it is not that bad” DOES FUCKING MATTER.

    ‘Priviledge’ (in the Social Justice FTB sense of the word not its conventional english meaning) is an idea which has some truth in it – but also is irrelevant when it comes to what really matters logic and scientific evidence

    In other words, who gives a fuck about social justice, you’ve got logic and science! What was that about ethics again?

  • abear

    antepro@37:

    In other words, who gives a fuck about social justice, you’ve got logic and science! What was that about ethics again?

    In other other words, who gives a fuck about logic, science, reason, or critical thinking skills, you’ve got social justice! And why worry about ethics if you’re sufficiently self righteous?

  • leonardschneider

    One thing the study left out is the athleticism of trolls. Meet ’em in person, and damn can they run fast!

    (*sigh*) Oh well. I’ve had a long-standing policy, going back to my Usenet days, of never saying anything online I wouldn’t say to someone’s face. Not sure if that’s good or bad; after all, asking a total stranger in a parking lot if he was born stupid or if he took it up as a hobby can possibly waste several minutes of my day. (No, I’m not a tough guy, I don’t pretend to be one, and I don’t want to be one. But um, sometimes I do have trouble with impulse control.)

    Personally, everybody trying to define what a troll is are making it too complex. A troll isn’t nobody but some pussy who posts shit for the sole purpose of angering/enraging/horrifying a large group, i.e., a message board or newsgroup. Like several years ago, some newspaper in New York tracked down a shitbag whose idea of fun was posting vivisection pictures to cat lover boards. No point to it, he was just a dick who felt like horrifying these (mostly) women. The article published his real name, too; I can’t help wonder if anyone went after him. Personally? Somebody should have; it’s hard to be an asshole online with two broken hands. But that’s just me.

    But I can find holes in my own hypothesis. Say some anti-abortion/”right to life” dickwads take it upon themselves to post those late-term abortion photos they seem so fond of to a pro-choice site. Okay, the short answer is yeah, they’re trolling. (Although anybody who’s ever witnessed a “pro-life” rally or worked as an escort at a women’s health clinic has seen those pictures before: “Yeah, seeeen iiiitt.“) But to the pro-lifer, they aren’t trolling, they’re trying to get their Important Message across, with their usual tact and grace. So whether trolling is taking place has now become subjective. The pro-lifer isn’t getting any of the sadistic pleasure from posting his “gross ’em out for Jesus” pictures, he thinks he’s actually accomplishing something.

    Overall though, I have a hard time considering trolls to be anything other than complete pussies, genuinely weak people who feel powerless in their day-to-day lives. No real need to over-analyze ’em. They do what they do for— yeah, there’s some sadistic jolly they get, I’m sure, but it’s more about them creating a personal illusion of power: I posted these slaughterhouse pics on a vegan website; by doing so I have caused people to be angry and frightened. Thus, I have power over them, I can make them miserable at my whim. I’m the strong one, not them, and they can’t touch me.

    Heh. Trolls shouldn’t carry those last four words too far. It’s always been easier than people like to think to track someone down. F’r instance, say you’re a troll whose idea of fun is to post rape-porn pictures with a caption of “This is what you punk rock cunts all deserve” to a local hardcore website/message board. You’re doing it a dozen or so times a day…. But only between, say, 9 a.m. and 6 p.m., and never on weekends.

    Hmm. Clue number one: the troll is almost certainly using a work computer, and has a day job.

    So you check the IP address, and find it’s a static one, resolving to a law firm in downtown Oakland. Well, well.

    Logic impinges that (a) it’s a male, (b) he’ll be young — partners in law firms tend to not hold grudges against the local punk rock scene, and (c) given the troll’s fascination with the scene, he’ll be dressed straight, but will have short hair and probably be carrying a bag with band buttons/patches on it.

    So? Go downtown, wait, and watch, at the end of the work day.

    In a bit, nudge your friend. How about that guy? I think you’re right.

    “HEY! [message board nickname]!” The guy spun around towards us: score!

    “C’mere, we wanna talk to you.”

    And…. Zooom. Our troll was possessed by the ghost of Jesse Owens, and took off down Harrison St.

    We went after him for a few blocks, but then dropped it. He’d already nearly been hit by two different cars, and at the rate he was going, probably wasn’t going to stop until he hit Jack London Square…. And then might jump in the water and start swimming for Alameda.

    Well, mission accomplished, I suppose. It was never our intention to throw a boot party on the little fuckhead (it may be Oakland, but downtown, in the middle of the day? Not very wise), honest, we just wanted to ask him what his problem was, and explain he needed to find a better hobby. Get him up against a wall, at most. He did pull a powder off the message board: no surprise there, we knew what he looked like and where he worked. He would have been a damn nut to keep playing the same games on the board.

    What was puzzling for both Jake and I was that we didn’t recognize him, at all. Okay, the East Bay scene is pretty big, but if you’re around long enough, you’ll recognize people, even if you never meet them. We couldn’t recall ever seeing him at any shows, clubs, bars, record stores, on Telegraph, anywhere. So there’s the possibility he was a genuine recluse… But if so (presuming he had a computer at home), why do his trolling from work? All he did was make our job easier.

    And why his grudge? If he was gonna troll for the sake of trolling, there are a shitload of targets online. No, he picked a local board, and made it clear from his comments that he was local. So… He posted rape-porn on the board, sometimes naming the female members of bands (“[So-and-so], this is for you!!”) along with the pics, and then made it really damn easy to find him. These aren’t the actions of your standard “I get my power trip by making others unhappy” troll, something, somehow, had actually pissed him off. He was trolling for a sense of revenge.

    (Jesus) Um, I’ll shut up now, I’ve gone on for too long. Bad habit of mine. (At least I don’t talk how I write: anyone asking me, “Hey, what’s up?” would have the next 45 minutes monopolized.) So yeah, don’t over-analyze the trolls: they’re just dicks who feel powerless in real life. And if you get the chance, squash ’em like grapes!

  • abear

    Hey Democommie! This leonardschneider is obviously calling you a troll. You’re not going to let him get away with that are you?

  • abear

    I promise not to try to squeeze you like a grape though.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    @40&41;

    Actually, you piece of shit, I don’t recollect ever doing any of the things that he thinks trolls are in the habit of doing–expeshly the LMF/MRA* shit that you and your fellow shytepitters are so well known for.

    But, hey, if it makes you feel like you’re scoring points, have at it. Don’t forget to put the clothes in the dryer, though. Privileges come with responsibility, mister, and if you want to use the laundry room for your fortress of dickitude then you WILL be taking care of the laundry.

    Speaking of squeezing, make sure you wash your hands when you’re done fantasizing.

    * Lying Misogynistic Fuckbagasshole/MRA

  • abear

    Laundry room? Sorry dramacommie I don’t understand it when you Republicans attempt humor.

  • abear

    As a confessed troll I have no remorse about pointlessly winding up democommie.

    Now excuse me while I go expand my kingdom while torturing a puppy.

  • doublereed

    What the hell is “everyday sadism”? Sadism is a sexual paraphilia – it’s not an ‘everyday’ thing and I’ve encountered lots of people in my life who self-describe as “sadists” but who are not. Obviously, it’s a matter of degree but … being the kind of person who enjoys making someone else’s blood pressure spike does not make one a “sadist”.

    Sadomasochism isn’t necessarily sexual. It’s just usually in that context, because that’s the context that is the most fun to talk about.

    Bloodlust and such is all sadomasochism.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    @44:

    “As a confessed troll I have no remorse about pointlessly winding up democommie.”

    Wow, I need to copy this and put it in the “Archive of teh Burnin’ Stoopit” for future generations of bloggers to marvel at. And, to insert after any comment of yours that I see on this blog or elsewhere.

    thusly:

    “As a confessed troll I have no remorse about pointlessly winding up democommie.” (source: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/dispatches/2014/02/14/study-online-trolls-tend-to-be-sadistic/#comments)

    @44″.

    Self-awareness is obviously not your default state, fuckface.

    Calling me “Republican” on this blog, of all places, might cause a few people who had previously chalked you up as something other than a complete fuckhead to re-evaluate.

    “Now excuse me while I go expand my kingdom while torturing a puppy.”

    By doing what exactly, making it listen to you bloviate about your innate superiority to the rest of humanity. If he dog take a shit on your floor, it won’t be because it isn’t housebroken.

  • abear

    @46: Shucks Cletis, I thought that you driving a pick up truck with truck nuts and a Ted Cruz for President bumper sticker to KKK meetings made you a default Republican! I guess you’re just too right wing for the Republican Party? Tea Party Plus maybe?

    Oh and you’re just pissed at the MRAs because they kicked you out for hating women too much.!

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    @47:

    Wow. When you people have a melt down it’s just like shit runnin’ down a dog’s leg. No, really.

  • Pingback: Study: Online Trolls Tend to Be Sadistic – Freethought Blogs | Study Dream()

  • Pingback: Study: Online Trolls Tend to Be Sadistic – Freethought Blogs | Study Experts()

  • Pingback: Study: Online Trolls Tend to Be Sadistic – Freethought Blogs | Study Professionals()

  • Pingback: Study Degree Experts » Study: Online Trolls Tend to Be Sadistic – Freethought Blogs()

  • Pingback: Study: Online Trolls Tend to Be Sadistic – Freethought Blogs | Best Study()

  • exi5tentialist

    Of course, another way to be sadistic is to label someone as a troll who is agitating against an oppressive group mindset.

    “Troll” is a powerful accusation to direct at anybody. Sometimes the accusation is sound, sometimes not. Without looking at specifics, it is always impossible to tell.

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    @ ^ exi5tentialist : Yes. Its easy to throw the term “troll” around with out sufficient reason.

    @ 34. Marcus Ranum :

    You mean like the dumbass comment you dropped in the license plate thread less than an hour ago? The impression you’re an asshole would probably fade if you weren’t doing such a great job of constantly reinforcing it.

    Your subjective and erroneous opinion of my comment is your own – its isn’t right or a fair assessment of it.

    @37. anteprepro :

    The sad part is that you might be able to fool people into thinking you are right about this. You were not pre-judged: you were just judged. Accurately.

    What basis do you have to claim your subjective personal opinion of me is accurate? You do not know me, you are just a cyberbully with zero reading comprehension and a prejudiced false impression of who I am that bears no resemblence to reality.

    And now you are going to scamper away to other blogs, whining and playing victim, with audiences that have no idea what actually went on and thus might actually believe your delusional complaints are truthful.

    No my complaints are quite real. You tried to organise a ganging up cyberbash against me via Pharyngula a blog where I can’t defend myself and all your gang hang out. You didn’t have the guts to respond and address me and my arguments directly – like I’m doing here.

    And no I’m not scampering off anywhere although I do participate on other blogs as well but I will tell the truth as I know it to be when that is appropriate.

    It’s {priviledge -ed.] a matter of perspective. And if we are talking about the life experiences of an underprivileged group, than someone who is privileged chiming in to say “it is not that bad” DOES FUCKING MATTER.

    Well for starters that not what I do. For seconds its still logically and scientifically irrelevant and for thirds the reason its irrelevant is because the facts and evidence are what counts and if one side has the facts and evidence saying it was that bad then that is what counts most.

    Or do you think the truth depends on how is speaking and only those who aren’t priviledegd ever can or do utter it?

    In other words, who gives a fuck about social justice, you’ve got logic and science! What was that about ethics again?

    Ethics and social justice are separate topics. Lots of people including myself give plenty of fucks and care a lot about both. But it doesn’t mean that when it comes to assessing arguments you ignore science and logic which are the key factors there.

    I do believe in social justice and working to make the world better for everyone as you’d know if you actually read my past comments correctly instead of misreading and misrepresenting them into a strawmonster of your own devising.

  • dingojack

    Stevo – you’d better call triple zero immediately, ask for a waaaaaambulance.

    For those that aren’t familiar with Stevo’s whine against anteprepro, it kinda goes like this:

    anteprepro: Wow there’s some guy called Stevo sprouting some bigoted nonsense over there. What an idiot!

    someoneelse: Where?

    anteprepro: Oh over at Ed’s Blog. See for yourself.

    Stevo: BIGOTRY! PERSECUTION!! LYNCH-MOB!!! Waaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!

    @@

    Dingo