Internet trolls are horrible people ...

yes

Post 1 

"Both trolls and sadists feel sadistic glee at the distress of others. Sadists just want to have fun ... and the Internet is their playground!""

 Well, here we are : how to have fun, reason I live here in France since Rabelais, instead of Switerland (i suggest THun , Interlaken instead of Gstaad, avoid zurich, go to Bale Tinguely Park 5*), what ever the level of taxes is ?

How to have fun and hurt nobody ? it is so difficult we have here now TRIALS against comics, it started with Coluche fired by RADIO MONTE CARLO because he could make joskes on speakin' about RAINIER.

He came at nine AM, and said "Aaaaah! Rainier  " then started one or two times.

At 12 AM he was fired, "Aaaaah Rainier" is french word for cob, Rainier was Prince of Monaco, well knowfor tax industrial techniwues to avoid it, in competition with Island Cayman. Sensitive Pincipauté !

He was a comic, a troll in real life, a nice Je suis charlie Spirit guy, a clown, but not a sadist,  even if Rainier prince forbid Him to go back to his Monaco Land.

So ph D says in post one it is better to avoid trolling to be fun, who could explain how to be funny without being tough on certain communities, habit, countries, political partys, whatgood boookavoid to mention to have fun , etc ....

Is there any stuff about "how to be funny and have fun without be prosecuted or villain ???" The psy ph D always say what to avoid,clowns are pathetics, etc .. never how to do. 

D1OR

                    Chess.com needs moderators like THIS                                                                

No, it is not satire.  It is offensive troll conduct.  Thanks for dropping by.

Some of the worst trolls on the site are shedding big crocodile tears they can't spread their brand of hatred everywhere

yes OP that is satire. In Skye Island , ha, ha, Gawd. Scotch and fog make legends. Shortest, best !

d1OPr

We now will have bigbold soon. Top chrono. Legends fly twin. . 

A thread with no twin legends is Laurel withour Hardy, Grosso without modo, french without bashing. Just flat.

Legend start alone, first satire. Then velociraptors. Just say yes to legend, whatever they say.

Don't you think the narcissistic trolls are likely to consider this thread a victory for them? I don't think they're worthy of the attention. One or two have found their way onto my blocked list, but beyond that I don't really worry about them.

Yes, quite funny, Jamie / iron lung / kaynight / RJ Cote...  are you all the same person? Seriously its hard to tell ... 

Really? If Jamie has the talent to master all those very different styles, and the time to be all of them, she should leave Chess.com and make millions as an author.

Besides I just found out that I'm Jamie too. I can live with that, but I object to being told I'm the same person as RJC 

I personally never had any problems with trolls, if someone started bugging me I just ignored and it went away...didn't even bother myself to read what they wrote... but hey, some people just simply can't ignore it, it's not in their personality, they can't help but to read it, feel it, think about it, experience it, take it personally and suffer it. It's who they are, and I must agree with Jamie here, for these people trolling is indeed a nuisance, sometimes even devastating maybe. And I agree than trolls are actually unhappy people with some serious issues. But, they are not our friends, our colleagues, our spouses, they only exist on the net, plug out your modem and they're gone, they are alive and real only if you allow them to be.

Your definition of a troll is ridiculous. There are good and bad people, there are good and bad trolls. 

I think we all agree. We're talking about the bad trolls here.

Iluvmarlies wrote:

Your definition of a troll is ridiculous. There are good and bad people, there are good and bad trolls. 

Yes, there are different definitons of what "trolls" are. There isn't one commonly accepted definition, I propose we make up different names for the good and the bad ones then, so we can be able to speak about the same thing. Jamie is obviously speaking about the latter ones

Jamie / iron lung / kaynight / RJ Cote...  are you all the same person? Seriously its hard to tell ...                                                                                   41

Personnaly i think they are a weapon system, like an aircraft carrier, or coordinated velociraptors, one common think and four ways of writing , acting, etc ....some myterion one God in four persons, Trinity College thinking.

To learn UK english and american,  their semantic, it is quite different, Jamie never uses emoticones, ony Wotan could top here,  with RoJoCo you may have more emoticones than ...text !!, delicatesse of a B-52 on point fixe.

Kaynight is not under review, need more material to study deep Gibraltarian thinkings, Gawdd, Keeek, just saying.   que ?    Btw waiting for Mrs Peel !

one day we'll get que tal ? and in two years ola! que tal amigo ? (trad . Pulpo ty).

d1OPpr   Nobody is troll , just serious and infomative. Remember : No naming.

Now this here is a good troll.

Tracking thread.

I am an scientist, at least consider myself to be, because I am one, and would like to point out this the aforementioned paper is completely 110% valide because it draws it's results from the unerroring MECHCANICAL TURK.  All results, we know as chess players, can be trusted from such a device.  No one in all of history has used the MECHANICAL TURK to mislead or hood wink such great leaders as Joan of Arc, Ralph Lauren, that kid adopted kid, or the Pope.  Rest soundly, my friends, knowing the MECHANICAL TURK is watching you providing complete and unwavering factoids.

      Kikionfire wrote:

Exactly, all that time and effort spent creating different personas.

I mean Iron lung cancer, and I suppose the Jamie character, once you get the joke could be quite funny, but why bother? Life is surely too short...?

Indeed, why bother? So perhaps they are genuinely different people.

I notice that people only make these accusations against people who disagree with them. Nobody ever seems to think that accounts which agree with them might all be the same person.