I wasn't thinking so much of the trolls themselves, Molly, as the rest of us here. Even in the attenuated virtual world of ME, there are group processes going on, with encounters and developing relationships, as well as developing insights. A more complex group environment, as occours when obstacles crop up or, probably better, tension points coalesce, can have positive results. Like synchronicity, serendipity is also a state-option never far away.
We can learn from everything ... Francis On 25 Aug., 16:53, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > Good in what way? If these people are acting out as part of their > psychodrama, attention seeking and purposefully disruptive to satisfy > an obsession for negative attention, is it "good" to engage them in > ways that demean them? I find it cruel. They often set themselves up > in right or wrong scenarios so that they can fell persecuted and > injured. Is it good to give that to them? Or were you thinking that > it is good for you to engage now and then in controversy? The dance > of opposition can be invigorating, allowing us to feel the full gambit > of emotion. I think we can do this with folks that have a better > understanding what is occurring for both parties in the exchange, and > leave the trolls to find a place more conducive to finding some real > good or help for their condition. > > On Aug 25, 10:40 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > The interesting thing is, Molly, that it isn't all bad (as > > Frank'n'furter remarked to Jannette in the Rocky Horror Picture Show, > > after she'd been unfaithful to Brad with him :-)) > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVv9GjTXJ2A&feature=related > > > The passing of a troll through the waters of ME leaves all sorts of > > new counter-currents and unexpected eddies and in such circumstances > > creative and positive things can (and do) happen. I've used the > > analogy (even if scientific accuracy forces me to sadly admit that it > > has no basis in fact) of the grain of sand in the oyster. Despite the > > increased stress and frustration, shaking us up a bit can also be > > good. > > > Francis > > > On 25 Aug., 15:42, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > An interesting study in humanity, here in the Internet forums, isn't > > > it Jim? Not only do we learn about ourselves, some of the brilliant > > > ideas of our world, but also the aspects of human nature that may have > > > been hidden before. > > > > I once had an internship as part of a class with a suicide hotline. > > > In the five day training, we were told that most of the callers do not > > > have suicide intentions, but have other mental health problems that > > > lead them to continuously call the hotline. The program developed a > > > policy where these callers were allowed to call once in a 4 hour > > > period (a working shift) and there were those callers that always > > > exceeded the guidelines, and made a game of intrigue out of trying. > > > The philosophy of the program in accepting these calls was that it is > > > a service to the community, to give these folks an outlet to talk to > > > someone, and the families some relief in the overwhelming duty of > > > caring for them, some break or downtime in their attention to them. > > > > My gut feeling is that these are the Internet trolls that play with > > > the forums. They run the spectrum of intelligence, indeed, some are > > > highly intelligent, but have a borderline social functionality for > > > other reasons. The best we can do, and I think this group does a > > > pretty good job of it, is express compassion and let the mods provide > > > enough filter so that they are not disruptive to the group. It is not > > > easy to see them coming sometimes, the eventually the signs surface, > > > and then we can, as compassionately as possible, establish the > > > boundaries. These folks look for flame wars to enter, pouncing on > > > signs of controversy and disrespect. The flame goes up when we react > > > to their bait. Let's not give it to them. > > > > On Aug 25, 9:28 am, retiredjim34 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Fran - oh. It was? damn. Jim > > > > > On Aug 24, 4:41 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I just got a private mail from e_space, congratulating me on having > > > > > taken a more aggressive atitutude towards the mods. > > > > > > As I explained to him in a private mail, I now reiterate in the public > > > > > forum lest, improbably, some readers may not have understood ... > > > > > > People, it was satire, ok? > > > > > > Francis > > > > > > On 24 Aug., 08:59, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Selected takes from Surveillance System 3BE-45 / [various dates] / > > > > > > rating: TS (Board members only) > > > > > > > Mod#1: I’m worried about BB. He’s getting too close. > > > > > > > Mod#2: You mean …? > > > > > > > Mod#1: Yes, he may just be getting to a level where he starts to > > > > > > conceive suspicions about our true intent and purpose. > > > > > > > Mod#2: The achievement of total and complete word domination? > > > > > > > Mod#1: Precisely. This COULD become a new keith/Kevin attack. > > > > > > > Mod#2: You mean, the longer you leave it, the worse it gets? If > > > > > > that’s > > > > > > the case, then we’d better do something soon – > > > > > > > [Com unit blinks. A crackle of static.] > > > > > > > FA#7: Field agent seven here. Mod#1, are you there? > > > > > > > Mod#1: Go ahead, FA#7, communications secured … > > > > > > > [short break – a new camera angle] > > > > > > > FA#7: … and we’re just not succeeding in our attacks on him in the > > > > > > various threads. We can’t seem to faze the guy … > > > > > > > Mod#2: How do you know it’s a guy? > > > > > > > FA#7: Oh … oh, I see. We need more concrete information in order to > > > > > > … > > > > > > > Mod#1: … in order to deal with this situation – in a more permanent > > > > > > manner … > > > > > > > Mod#2: Quite! Nothing must be allowed to disturb our glorious course > > > > > > of world domination. The Dark Side WILL conquer! > > > > > > > On 23 Aug., 23:11, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > There are many ways to look at this group. This is merely my > > > > > > > dark > > > > > > > version. I will give you the upbeat positive version when I am in > > > > > > > that mood, should I survive. > > > > > > > > There is a sickness lurking in this group. A stench fills the > > > > > > > air. I might be alone in smelling it. A cancer has a foothold. > > > > > > > A > > > > > > > callous detachment, a resignation, the players separated into > > > > > > > packs > > > > > > > and lone individuals. The once human eyes roll back white, and > > > > > > > when > > > > > > > the attack is over, they roll forward to reveal their black , > > > > > > > cold , > > > > > > > unaffected stares. It is a prison yard, a shark tank. If only > > > > > > > being > > > > > > > wrong was not the ultimate horror of human beings. What a > > > > > > > different > > > > > > > world we would live in. > > > > > > > > There is less and less risks taken in here, and who could blame > > > > > > > them? There are those safe in the shadows, who only come out to > > > > > > > feed > > > > > > > when it is safe. Safety itself is now defined as back into self, > > > > > > > where “I know and they don’t” rules supreme. I see this as a > > > > > > > sad > > > > > > > statement of resignation and worship of a false idol. An > > > > > > > acceptance > > > > > > > that this is the way of the world. Any attempts at engagement > > > > > > > are too > > > > > > > easily perceived as an assault or an attack, then what follows > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > the silent retreat back to the perception of safety and > > > > > > > righteousness. Oh, the comfort of knowing and they don’t. > > > > > > > > Another shank stabbing in the prison yard? “That is what > > > > > > > happens” “he had it coming” “he should have known better” > > > > > > > “You > > > > > > > just don’t do that” “He was a fool to try that” “you don’t mess > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > somebody tougher than you” “He picked the wrong person to fight > > > > > > > with” “doesn’t he know that guy’s reputation? What an idiot” > > > > > > > “You don’t mess with those above you in the pecking order, how > > > > > > > could > > > > > > > he not know that?” > > > > > > > “He deserved it” “hey, there is going to be a fight, come on > > > > > > > let’s > > > > > > > watch” “I pay not attention to him, he is a child” “ I am going > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > stick it to him someday” > > > > > > > > People resort to using quotes of famous people. Not that > > > > > > > this is > > > > > > > bad in and of itself, for it is valuable information, but when > > > > > > > looked > > > > > > > at from the view of the prison yard, this scores big points, it > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > relatively safe, and it is certainly safer than using your own > > > > > > > words > > > > > > > which are much more vulnerable to attack. It is like flashing a > > > > > > > knife > > > > > > > to another inmate, “I have this weapon and more where that came > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > pal....at my fingertips, don’t mess with me. I have protection. > > > > > > > I > > > > > > > have back-up. I have the CREDIBILITY, I can’t be touched, don’t > > > > > > > even try. You are no match for me.” > > > > > > > > As if being no match for another means a student can’t argue > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > the teacher. The climate of fear, the climate of the pecking > > > > > > > order, > > > > > > > the climate of a prison yard.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
