Meeting A Troll • Hacker News Board

Re: Meeting A Troll

#171

Post by voldemort12 » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 3:21 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #30

> He wanted to call the authorities there and then and turn him in. But I said no. That's an impressive show of self control, but I wonder if his next victims will have preferred that you did contact the authorities. Presumably, at age 17 this guy won't be living with his parents for much longer.

> That's an impressive show of self control,

It would be, if this had happened. Which I sincerely doubt.

I do not doubt that OP went through some real awful stuff at the behest of his troll, or that he even met or confronted his troll, but this story is just too finely crafted to be a true reflection of real life. I could be wrong, but, honestly, I doubt it.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#172

Post by debacle » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 3:25 PM UTC

wamatt wrote: post #85

ary wrote: post #53

It's difficult to read this and not think that a psychopath was let off the hook because he was young. Outing and labeling these kinds of people is important to curbing the amount of future damage they can do. There is bullying, there is harassment, and then there is what the OP experienced. No reasonable, rational individual who is just "acting out" in adolescence takes it to these levels. As much as I feel for the…

As much as I loathe being the guy defending trolls, the level of judgement expressed in this thread is a bit troubling. Labeling this kid a 'pyschopath' might feel nice, but it's rather inaccurate. [1]. Specifically when he saw the damage he'd caused, a very human emotional response of remorse and regret kicked in. We have no reason to believe it's fake, especially given we weren't the one's there, and the author bel…

It's very easy to fake a very human emotional response, especially when those around you are sympathetic (e.g your parents).

Re: Meeting A Troll

#173

Post by ZoFreX » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 3:30 PM UTC

zxcdw wrote: post #31

citricsquid wrote: post #22

that is not "trolling", that's (pretty bad) harassment. I get the feeling this is a story written to prove a point. Nobody would refer to this as "trolling".

How would you define trolling and a troll? I'm sincerely asking since it is my understanding that these days harassment over the internet is often cited as trolling, as in for example "We trolled Jane by spamming her inbox full of animal abuse and violence lol". I work part-time at a school with kids ranging from 7 to 16, and of what I've tried to inquire them about the subject(I'm 22 myself, so it's quite easy to go…

Trolling, as I first encountered the term (on 4chan, many years ago, back when "trolling was a art") was nothing new. My dad's generation calls it "fishing", and engages in it offline by parroting Daily Mail-esque views in the pub because they know I will "bite".

These days it seems to be a cover-word for the sickest, most malicious bullying, and also the most yawn-inducing unimaginative pranks... basically, any behaviour that could possibly be frowned upon by anyone is defended after the fact with "no, I was trolling" (a valid defence when you're espousing views of the far right with no sincerity... a less valid defence when you actually have just done something terrible)

Re: Meeting A Troll

#174

Post by InclinedPlane » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 3:31 PM UTC

engtech wrote: post #159

InclinedPlane wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it would be detrimental to him to "grow up" then will it not be detrimental to society to put him out in a world where he could do harm to others? Especially given that he already has a history of doing exactly that? If the premise here is that this man-child is too immature to take on the responsibilities of adult society (such as the right to own firearms, the right to drive automobiles, the right to drink alcoh…

"then should he not be kept away from society and denied the ability to hurt others?" How long do you think he should be kept away from society? His actions don't justify a life sentence or the death penalty, so he's going to be part of society at some point. Is taking him out of society going to make him a better person? No. The best way to rehabilitate someone is for them to have something to lose. If this 17yo had…

I'm suggesting no such thing. I'm saying that if someone thinks that this person should be sheltered entirely from the consequences of his actions then it is similarly logical to shelter society from his cruelty. If you'll notice I haven't actually suggested a course of action for dealing with him, I've only suggested that he needs to experience consequences for his hateful and violent attacks.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#175

Post by scythe » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 3:31 PM UTC

Destroyer661 wrote: post #149

InclinedPlane wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stop. Rewind. You are calling a 17 year old person a "child". This is wrong, and perfectly in keeping with the trend of failing to raise children into mature adults. 17 year olds will be able to vote on their next birthday. They can hold jobs, they can drive cars, they can fly planes, they can even serve in the armed forces with their parents' permission. 17 year olds fought in the battle of Iwo Jima. Calling this pe…

17 year olds may be able to do all of those things, however we know that the average male's forebrain doesn't fully develop until much later, as much as 8 years later. Some males aged 25 still have not developed to the point of advanced reasoning. Reasoning like being able to see the consequences and harm done by stunts such as sending threats like this. It's certainly not enough to dismiss this and say "he's 17, he'…

Who cares about a "fully developed" brain, if there is even such a thing? Human beings at any age are largely irresponsible and irrational and most people never move beyond this. Yet I know that the vast majority of 17-year-olds I have encountered do not mail boxes of ashes to Jews, or anything of the sort. That his brain is not totally "developed" absolves nothing. Should a person with an IQ of 100 serve less time than a person with an IQ of 140, because the latter is more "capable of rationality", or whatever other quality you want to ascribe to the mind? At some point, certainly short after the reasonable age of entry into the working world (probably sixteen) people need to be expected to act decently. Sure, I'm in favor of rehabilitation -- punishment is a revenge-instinct and waste of resources -- but we should do ourselves and these people the service of being honest about what they are: criminals.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#176

Post by Tichy » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 4:05 PM UTC

minitrollster wrote: post #167

Tichy wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think kids should be trained like pets? It seems a lot of people do, they also think they own their kids somehow. Sad... As I said in another comment: personally I hope my kid will end up doing what is right because he believes it the right thing to do, not because of fear of punishment. Not saying that punishment is never necessary (I am not sure). Obviously it works, because people (and animals) can learn fr…

I do not think that kids should be trained like pets. They are more intelligent and react to a more nuanced approach. My point about punishment just means that bad actions should be sanctioned and good actions rewarded. My parents never physically punished me, but as soon as I was old enough to understand what was going on, just knowing that I'd disappointed them would make me feel extremely bad. There's no resentmen…

Sure - I think if people endanger other people, they should be locked away. In some (most?) cases we don't know how to "cure" criminals yet.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#177

Post by yelsgib » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 4:07 PM UTC

InclinedPlane wrote: post #121

yelsgib wrote: post #57

For those of you who claim that the right thing in this situation would be to turn the child over to the authorities - what exactly do you think the authorities are going to do to make this situation better? The child obviously has some darkness that he needs to work through - to work through darkness he needs the support of a loving community. I find it very sad and disturbing that some commenters (who I assume are…

Stop. Rewind. You are calling a 17 year old person a "child". This is wrong, and perfectly in keeping with the trend of failing to raise children into mature adults. 17 year olds will be able to vote on their next birthday. They can hold jobs, they can drive cars, they can fly planes, they can even serve in the armed forces with their parents' permission. 17 year olds fought in the battle of Iwo Jima. Calling this pe…

Stop. Fast-forward.

First of all, you're picking on a very small point. The fact that I referred to this guy/kid/whatever as a "child" isn't really crucial to my argument except perhaps in a pretty indirect/connotative manner.

Second of all, to me, this kid is a child. I know some 30+ year old grown-ass men and women who are children. I was remarking on his (apparent) lack of maturity and his position within the community (still living with parents, pulling [admittedly extreme] "pranks", not living with the consequences of his actions).

I agree that to be an adult you need responsibility and that to get there you must increasingly suffer the consequences of your actions. My point (which you have avoided responding to entirely) centers on the fact that, in the US and the UK, turning ANYONE (child or adult) over to the "authorities" is not any sort of reasonable or useful consequence and, what's more, that it is disturbing to me that this particular idea of "punishment" or "consequences" or "justice" or whatever seems to continue to penetrate the public consciousness.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#178

Post by Tipzntrix » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 4:09 PM UTC

fusiongyro wrote: post #164

yelsgib wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I believe we should surround them with love and forgiveness. We also should -have- provided them with love and forgiveness so that they would feel comfortable talking about their problems before they could result in severe issues. What do -you- suggest we do? Beat them up? "Teach them a lesson?" What will that accomplish, exactly? --- Let me just say that I sense a great deal of pain in you. This is not an attac…

Sometimes what's best for society isn't what's best for the individual. Society benefits from having sadists removed from the equation. It doesn't matter much, from a societal standpoint, whether they're rehabilitated or incarcerated, as long as the sadistic entity is removed from the equation. If there were no examples of sadists who could not be rehabilitated, your point would be obviously true. Unfortunately, ther…

As such, this is also one of the arguments for the death penalty. If that risk you speak of is too high to see any chance of rehabilitation, what good does incarceration do?

Still, this child has no repeat history that we know of, and probably wasn't reprimanded for his behaviour before. It is likely that he could be a psychopath with everything he said, but it is also likely that the veil of anonymity made him less sympathetic to the human plight of his victim, just as we all take what we see on the internet with a grain of salt.

EDIT: Ok, maybe not really a child, but in the eyes of the law you might as well consider a minor a child. However, I sure know few hackers who exploit their status as a minor as best they can to avoid legal consequences.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#179

Post by unreal37 » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 4:26 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #116

muhuk wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would probably do the same thing, I would probably not report the child of my friend to authorities. But looking at this as a third person; I think he got away too easily. He did something evil, he got caught and what are the consequences? A slap on the wrist.

If he has any connection to his parents at all, the embarrassment of being outed in front of his parents might be more than just a slap on the wrist. Also, is this the "an eye for an eye" theory of justice? Personally I hope that my kid will behave in a good way because he considers it the right thing to do, not because he is afraid of punishment.

It's not an eye for an eye. But it is actions and consequences.

If you take an extreme crime (like murder), I don't think you'll find many people who would say "there should be no consequences to that as long as the person is truly sorry for what they did". There must be some level of punishment, and there will be disagreement about what the appropriate level is.

Now this was not murder, but it was true terror over a period of 4 years. Do those actions have consequences? Or just give him a hug?

This 17 year old has problem, and he needs intensive psychological counselling at the very least. He didn't know why he did it? It was just a game? Those are scary answers and the problem needs to be fixed.

At least having him in the police database, fingerprints, IP address records, reports from his counselling sessions - would make it easier for someone else to catch him next time he does this. The next person he does this to will be starting from scratch trying to find out who this was, like the author was 4 years ago.

Re: Meeting A Troll

#180

Post by SilasX » Tue, Sep 25, 2012, 5:04 PM UTC

yread wrote: post #117

wamatt wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I loathe being the guy defending trolls, the level of judgement expressed in this thread is a bit troubling. Labeling this kid a 'pyschopath' might feel nice, but it's rather inaccurate. [1]. Specifically when he saw the damage he'd caused, a very human emotional response of remorse and regret kicked in. We have no reason to believe it's fake, especially given we weren't the one's there, and the author bel…

You can read more about the value of tears of a psychopath here http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2... Harris married his deceitfulness with a total lack of remorse or empathy—another distinctive quality of the psychopath. Fuselier was finally convinced of his diagnosis when he read Harris' response to being punished after being caught breaking into a van. Klebold and Harris had avoided prose…

Okay, that would demonstrate that we should place little weight on expressions of empathy, but I disagree if the implication is supposed to be that it's evidence of psychopathy.

Remember, genuinely remorseful people would say the same things to their victims. If you're going to take genuine-looking apologies as evidence for the psychopath diagnosis, then you're falling into the trap of "If she prays at the execution, that confirms she's a witch. If she doesn't pray, that confirms she's a witch."

The relevant evidence in the above link is the journal, not the apology.