troll 1 Audio Help (trōl) Pronunciation Key

v. trolled, troll·ing, trolls

v. tr.

1.

1. To fish for by trailing a baited line from behind a slowly moving boat.

2. To fish in by trailing a baited line: troll the lake for bbum.

3. To trail (a baited line) in fishing.

That is the correct reference when saying “He/she is trolling” or “He/she got trolled”. Those are actual valid words from the dictionary in reference to a style of fishing where you let your line into the water and wait for a bite. The relation being someone who for example, goes onto a forum and makes a post with the word “fine upstanding member of society” in it, to see how many people will flip out about it. That person is “trolling” for angry responses. They aren’t actively abusing or badgering anybody.

The only reason people think of “trolls” as the mythical creatures is because the majority of 4chan goons and livejournal self-indulged morons (who will self-proclaim command of the English language ironically) immediately bumociated the word with the only instance of it they knew, which was of a mythical creature stemming from Lord of the Rings or Dungeons and Dragons. Surprised they didn’t bumociate it with the real reference, an outdoor activity?

Chances are you’ve all been using the term improperly (because you’re dumb). Somebody is not a “troll”, nor are they “trolling” anybody, as are they not being “trolled” by them, if they are directly badgering or harbuming somebody. Thank you and goodnight. Log in to see images! Cool guy from ALOL named Oleander edited this message on 06/10/2008 8:55PM

Cool guy from ALOL named Oleander Posted:

troll 1 Audio Help (trōl) Pronunciation Key

v. trolled, troll·ing, trolls

v. tr.

1.

1. To fish for by trailing a baited line from behind a slowly moving boat.

2. To fish in by trailing a baited line: troll the lake for bbum.

3. To trail (a baited line) in fishing.

That is the correct reference when saying “He/she is trolling” or “He/she got trolled”. Those are actual valid words from the dictionary in reference to a style of fishing where you let your line into the water and wait for a bite. The relation being someone who for example, goes onto a forum and makes a post with the word “fine upstanding member of society” in it, to see how many people will flip out about it. That person is “trolling” for angry responses. They aren’t actively abusing or badgering anybody.

The only reason people think of “trolls” as the mythical creatures is because the majority of 4chan goons and livejournal self-indulged morons (who will self-proclaim command of the English language ironically) immediately bumociated the word with the only instance of it they knew, which was of a mythical creature stemming from Lord of the Rings or Dungeons and Dragons. Surprised they didn’t bumociate it with the real reference, an outdoor activity?

Chances are you’ve all been using the term improperly (because you’re dumb). Somebody is not a “troll”, nor are they “trolling” anybody, as are they not being “trolled” by them, if they are directly badgering or harbuming somebody. Thank you and goodnight. Log in to see images!

You are wrong because of the follow reasons:

1. They call me the seeker

2. I’ve been searching low and high

3. I won’t get to get what I’m after

4. Till the day I die

TeeKayEff Posted:

trolls live under bridges

CORRECT, I WOULD’VE ALSO ACCEPTED:

1. Get me on the run

2. loaded up my gun

3. blowing up the spot

4. hiding cause i’m hot

5. fire is my friend

6. marking were i’ve been

7. committed every sin

8. and do it all again

Good job Jonathan, B+

Yes, yes I see. Posts containing song lyrics… Must’ve been a subconscious reaction to reading the term “livejournal” in the OP. Log in to see images!

Hai.

i am a cool poster from something called AOHELL

the term “troll” in reference to baiting posters into getting angry replies was around long before 4Chan.

have a nice day. Log in to see images!

Log in to see images!

AAHZ Posted:

Hai.

i am a cool poster from something called AOHELL

the term “troll” in reference to baiting posters into getting angry replies was around long before 4Chan.

have a nice day. Log in to see images!

Log in to see images!

Yes, this is exactly what I said in the OP; that websites such as 4chan and livejournal distorted the meaning of the word troll through their ignorance of terms to do with outdoor activities. Log in to see images!

If I sit there and poke at you until you freak, that’s trolling.

So, pestering/badgering -IS- trolling.

Game discussion folks, no trolling!

AAHZ Posted:

Well i actually somewhat agree with you.

which is why i think we need a flamer clbum.

but we don’t so…

Log in to see images!

Very funny Jonathan, SEE ME. this is the correct answer:

1. I came a long way to see you, now i just wanna leave you

2. I came a long way to see you, now i wish you were dead, wish you were dead

Cool guy from ALOL named Oleander Posted:

I was really disappointed to see there wasn’t a Know-It-All clbum where your special attacks were super long paragraphs detailing how somebody is wrong about something.

You’re Wrong Because I’m Right

When we observe a culture different from ours, many aspects of that culture appear to be undeniably wrong. The reaction generated in western readers by Yukio Mishima’s Patriotism illustrates this point. The main characters of the story, Lieutenant Takeyama Shinji and his wife Reiko, commit ritual suicide in order to preserve their honor. In the Japanese culture, their actions probably appear to be very honorable. I am not exactly sure about this since I do not know too much about Japanese culture. However, in the eyes of the western world, this suicide is a mortal sin. Nevertheless, I do not think that the actions of the lieutenant and his wife can be judged by standards not a part of their culture and that, within the expectations of Japanese culture, not only did they take the correct course of action, but the only one that was available to them.

Whenever two cultures meet, there are always problems. Some customs and traditions of one will be seen negatively by the other. At times, members of one culture might judge the other society by their own standards. For example, people in the United States, which, for the most part, are Christian, might feel inclined to judge Lieutenant Shinji and his wife as having committed mortal sin. However, in Japan, it might be quite an acceptable, and even an honorable, act. In yet another country, suicide might not be a sin, but it may be viewed as an act of the most cowardly nature. Thus, every culture will look upon this suicide in a different light. Is any perspective a true perspective? I do not think so. If there is an ultimate truth above and beyond those established by each culture, the suicide could be judged in those terms. It might seem that such truths exist. After all, Christians believe in their values and those values were handed down by God. God is a universal Being, having created the entire universe, and thus His truths must be universal and applicable to all peoples. However, Moslems feel the same about their religion. So do the Hindus, the Buddhists, and probably all religions in the world. A kind of paradox is discovered here. We think we know what the ultimate truth is, but we cannot use it to judge people from another culture. We believe our values are true and universal. We try to impose these beliefs on others who have “wrong” values. At the same time, they feel the same about us. As a result, we end up with many sets of “universal” truths, and, since we do not know which set is the true set (of course, we always believe ours to be the one true set, but then so does the next guy), we cannot use any of these to judge a culture different from ours. In the eyes of the Japanese culture, the double suicide of the couple is not a sinful act. It is an action filled with honor and dignity. Since the suicide occurred within the confines of Japanese culture, I believe it can only be judged in light of the values of the Japanese culture. It would be wrong to condemn the couple because suicide is wrong in the western mind. The couple was raised with the Japanese culture and it is from that culture that they took their values. It must be from within that value system that they are judged.

As I have said, I do not believe that the suicide was wrong in the eyes of Japanese culture. In addition, I do not think that there was any alternative for the lieutenant and his wife. It is evident from the story that both were very loyal to the emperor. Everyday, they bowed to the picture of the emperor that was on their god-shelf and, presumedly, prayed to or for him. The lieutenant was in the imperial army which served the emperor and had strong ties of loyalty to him. The most disgraceful act the lieutenant could commit would be to betray the emperor.

As I see it, the lieutenant has two major options. He could obey the orders that he expects the emperor to give him or he could join the rebellion. The lieutenant expects the emperor to order him to lead forces against the rebellion. If he obeyed the emperor, he would be betraying him. The lieutenant believes in the rebellion. The rebels felt that the emperor’s power was being usurped by government ministers and they tried to eradicated those ministers in order to restore the emperor’s power. They had the best of intentions for the emperor in mind. They were helping him fix a problem he was blind to. If the lieutenant attacked the rebels, he would be thwarting their attempt to help the emperor and would instead be jeopardizing the emperor’s position in the power structure of the government. In a way, he would be betraying the best interests of the emperor.

If the lieutenant disobeyed the emperor and joined the rebellion, he would be directly betraying the emperor. In most military organizations, the failure to carry out orders is the worst form of treason. Thus, a failure to obey orders would be seen as treacherous and would bring nothing but public humiliation and disgrace. If he attacked the rebels, he would not experience this public disgrace, but I am sure he would feel personal dishonor and, to him, that is just as bad. The lieutenant is in a catch twenty-two situation with only one way out. The only option that preserves his honor is seppuku. In this way, he is not forced to betray the emperor and he can have a clear conscience.

Patriotism, when read by a non-Japanese audience, illustrates the problems encountered when two cultures with different value systems meet. A western reader is filled with outrage at the thought that a society could exist in which ritual suicide is acceptable and even honorable. The western reader tries to place his or her value system on the Japanese society and condemn it by those values. However, such action is wrong. If we ever want to understand another culture, we must look at things through their values, even if we do not agree with them. We cannot use our standards to condemn another society. Every culture has a different set of values and each one believes that their’s is the correct one, or at least one of several correct ones if they allow for other “true ways”. No culture has the right to say that their’s is the one true way and try to impose that way on others. For all we know, we could be wrong and they could be right. Of course, we believe we are right, but then so do they. Judging other cultures by our values has caused many problems throughout history and the world. It is about time that we realized other people have a right to believe what they want to believe and stop trying to impose our values on them.