Next time, another troll, another thread, another critique.
A trolling critique
Sort:
Jan 9, 2017
0
#3
Wow, this was very interesting. You deserve to post on news. I'm very intrigued by your long posts, you make them fun, but always add that 'sophisticated' element.
I suggest your next troll should be...
I will message you the troll.
Jan 10, 2017
0
#4
FM_Checkmate wrote:
Wow, this was very interesting. You deserve to post on news. I'm very intrigued by your long posts, you make them fun, but always add that 'sophisticated' element.
I suggest your next troll should be...
I will message you the troll.
Thank you for your feedback and for the suggestion. I still don't know when I will post the next iteration of the series, maybe in two weeks, perhaps in a month. I suppose it will be enough time to see the candidate's whole potential.
As for posting on the news section, well, that would be a bit difficult, wouldn't it?
kaynight wants in.
Lola's "castle" thread is now legendary- and we will remember it a long, long time. but its still young, other threads have gone further. and for all her stubbornness I find Lola, interesting to talk to and not troll like.
if you wanted up and coming trolls. Vlad, dude and his "tobey maquire, made Fischer a celebrity" is pretty darn nice. he's got a few past threads where he balances out a fake courtesy with provocative and passive-agressive replies...
and then there is QC.
anyways, lets stick to the subject at hand, king. What do you make "tobey maguire" chess...
Jan 10, 2017
0
#6
thegreat_patzer wrote:
kaynight wants in.
Lola's "castle" thread is now legendary- and we will remember it a long, long time. but its still young, other threads have gone further. and for all her stubbornness I find Lola, interesting to talk to and not troll like.
if you wanted up and coming trolls. Vlad, dude and his "tobey maquire, made Fischer a celebrity" is pretty darn nice. he's got a few past threads where he balances out a fake courtesy with provocative and passive-agressive replies...
and then there is QC.
anyways, lets stick to the subject at hand, king. What do you make "tobey maguire" chess...
I didn't know he had come back. And at last he decided to embrace his inner troll. Good material indeed.
Kaynight is a happy fellow with a short quip and a good sense of sarcasm.
he is ALWAYS, (briefly) getting in the middle of something contentious.
<gawd>
I rate him as one of the better trolls on chess.com. RJC too.... the candy cane show should be given an journalistic award. IMHO
...
i think the forums should be used to share ideas.
people don't need to rate the quality of content and then call other people names like "trolls" or "unicorns"
very rude
Jan 12, 2017
0
#10
RIP BronsteinPawn. May his great advanced elitist chess trolling material be remembered.
@kingofshedinjas' thread, A trolling critique, is a nice change of pace from the site's usual threads, which are all either opening-centred or just dumb, and a unique topic where we take a break from all of the garbage that floats around on the forums and enjoy a discussion about what's funny and what's not. His reviews have an interesting character to them: he rates threads on the outdated 0-5 scale when complex numbers are all the rage, he mentions "bumps" but doesn't say who bumped the thread, and he includes a full paragraph on the length of Post #1.
I have this one request: please keep your reviews to 140 characters. Your review included so much worthwhile material as to threaten the balance of the Chess.com universe. The 80-20 Principle now no longer holds true, and in a desperate attempt to return things to the way the were, nasty Type Twos will flood every remaining legitimate thread.
But it gets worse. Inevitably, newengland7 will change the source code to enlarge his block list so he can block them all, erasing all of our online ratings in a tragic accident.
Besides, it's more trollish that way.
I rate this thread 3.98 - 1.6432i.
Jan 12, 2017
0
#12
newengland7 makes me feel sorry for him. Posting so much stupid non-sense about his patzerian blitz games.
Jan 13, 2017
0
#13
What about the 'Relax and kill yourself', 'Relax and kill someone else' and that other one by ilovewingbills? Also the relax and be someone else and all the other threads like Tom's thread.
lol
why is it called trolling and not gnoming or dwarfing
that is true discrimination against the little people.
kingofshedinjas wrote:
Today I will start a series of threads reviewing troll threads. I still do not know how I often I will do this, it will depend on the feedback and the quality of the result.
Please, continue to series. I think it's a great idea!
Jan 28, 2017
0
#17
Great thread!
I prefer my trolls wacky rather than hateful. And you have to appreciate the way Lola worked on the thread. Too many trolls just spray the forum with weak threads that are abandoned quickly. It was also irreverent while thought-provoking. In terms of emotional impact it made me quite mad.
Therefore,
I would give it a better rating, between 4-4.8.
I prefer my trolls wacky rather than hateful. And you have to appreciate the way Lola worked on the thread. Too many trolls just spray the forum with weak threads that are abandoned quickly. It was also irreverent while thought-provoking. In terms of emotional impact it made me quite mad.
Therefore,
I would give it a better rating, between 4-4.8.
Jan 28, 2017
0
#18
I would recommend that we comment the trolling on chess terms: opening, middle game, endgame... Strategy, tactics... Victory, Draw, Defeat, stalemate... ;)
Esteban_Garcia wrote:
Great thread!
I prefer my trolls wacky rather than hateful. And you have to appreciate the way Lola worked on the thread. Too many trolls just spray the forum with weak threads that are abandoned quickly. It was also irreverent while thought-provoking. In terms of emotional impact it made me quite mad.
Therefore,
I would give it a better rating, between 4-4.8.
I prefer my trolls wacky rather than hateful. And you have to appreciate the way Lola worked on the thread. Too many trolls just spray the forum with weak threads that are abandoned quickly. It was also irreverent while thought-provoking. In terms of emotional impact it made me quite mad.
Therefore,
I would give it a better rating, between 4-4.8.
Out of 5? That's a fairly large range.
Today I will start a series of threads reviewing troll threads. I still do not know how I often I will do this, it will depend on the feedback and the quality of the result.
I have chosen this thread for the first review: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/why-cant-i-uncastle
Despite my distaste of the way The_Ghostess_Lola usually deals with commentators, I have to say this time I liked the result. The topic brings a breath of fresh air to the often repetitive issue of castling. It is a nice twist, and, as rare as originality is these days, we have to be thankful. It is not much, but these are hard times for trolling.
The original post is too long for the weak minds that wander here, and this is something every troll should be careful about. Too short and it will be seen as spam; too long and nobody will read it wholly. However, when you post a thread about FIDE laws of chess, and you want to tergiversate them, writing them is acceptable.
This excessive length caused the thread not to be popular at first. A big number of bumps later, the thread started to take off. However, given the kind of threads The_Ghostess_Lola usually posts and how obvious the intention of the bumps were, commenters were reluctant to feed her (or him?), simply calling for the lock or crying "Wolf, wolf!".
Despite all this, finally Lola achieved his purpose. People started to feed her. And we all know what happens then. I must say she did a pretty good job at responding, and that kept the thread alive for a long time.
To sum up, Ms. Ghostess succeeded this time, despite the obvious bumps; which is enough to guarantee her 3.5 stars out of five.