Zen and the Art of Trolling

First, you gotta talk the talk.

2010-04-24T10:12:00.004Z

You can't talk about this shit if you don't have the vocabulary. I try to write without (too much) jargon, but there are certain concepts and words you've just gotta know. They'll come up over and over again. I've added a lexicon to the sidebar for definitions of some of the most necessary words and acronyms. If you come across a word or abbreviation you don't understand and you can't find it in the sidebar, search Encyclopedia Dramatica (preferred) or Urban Dictionary to get a handle on the meaning.

Your Questions, Answered

2010-04-22T10:26:00.008Z

A couple days ago I asked for your questions about trolls and trolling. Man, there were some good questions, and in the interest of keeping the post to a manageable length, I feel like I didn't answer them in as much depth as they deserve. I'll end up revisiting a lot of these in their own posts.

Thanks for all the questions. Now on to the answers:

Q: What motivates one to become an internet troll?

Different people have different reasons.

I came with all the required traits built in--sarcasm; an eye for the absurd; a desire to mix things up a little, just to see what happens; and a natural inclination not to give a fuck what other people think of me. It's a translation of myself onto the internet, there just happens to be a convenient label to describe who I already was.

I've met some people who come to trolling through their own drama. They find themselves in the middle of a shitstorm, and they can either go the lol-cow route, making themselves a laughingstock, or they can come out the other side and say "lol, internets." The ones that get "lol, internets" generally stop taking it seriously. They end up labeled as trolls by the people that still think the internet is serious business.

Q: Is it difficult to remain in persona?

Not really, no. Most of my "persona" is just who I am anyway. I lie about the insignificant details a lot. Sometimes I forget what I said. Usually nobody notices; I always like when somebody does, and works really hard to use it to prove that I'm a liar, which I readily admit.

Some operations do require a certain persona to get into the target group. Then I try to keep it general, with only a few details to remember, and an archive somewhere so I can verify shit I've said before.

Q: How much drinking is required?

However much is needed to deaden the pain.

Q: How do you decide who would be a good subject for trolling?

Usually a display of USI catches my eye, or giant exploitable drama in something Google washes up. Mostly, I just toss myself into the mix and see who reacts. It's more about me being a catalyst for self-trolling than going in with a fixed target.

Q: Do you ever get caught out by becoming genuinely attached to someone you were trolling?

Do you mean an actual target? Oh hell no. There is a reason people get trolled. They are asking for it, begging for it, gagging for it. And most people that get trolled prefer the negative attention to no attention at all.

On the other side, the genuinely cool people with a decent sense of humor that I come across are what keeps a tiny spark of hope for the future of humanity kindling in my breast.

Q: Troll, my question is about why people consider you the enemy?

Not all of them do. Just the ones that suffer from USI. Normal people don't think they are important enough for me to show up out of the internet just to fuck with them.

Q: I see you have similar questions posted about this already therefore I ask why then are people who befriend the troll then considered the enemy as well?

Again, USI. It's the "with me or against me" mentality of people that can't conceive of not being the primary motivation behind someone else's actions. They take someone being "friends" with a troll as a direct personal attack. (In this case, "friends" can be anything from not becoming blindly hysterical with troll-hatred to showing it pictures of your tits and/or cock.)

Q: There is a big misconception about what the 'troll's purpose is on a site. Can you clarify why a troll, trolls.

For the lulz.

And why is this considered such a terrible thing?

It's not.

Q: Is the goal of a troll to shut down a site or make it untenable; or is it to simiply push the buttons of specific individuals who the troll feels "have it coming"? Or is it something else entirely?

In general, the "goal" varies with the target and the troll. Almost always, it's for the lulz. I could talk about this for pages, this is one of those questions that needs a whole post of its own. (Coming soon.)

Trolling With My Homies

2010-04-20T07:54:00.009Z

We're kind of like cockroaches--you may only see one, but in any concentrated trolling operation there are at least half a dozen trolls in action. If the community is ripe, word of the lulz will spread, and more will come.

There's an ecology in online communities. They can only support so many trolls in proportion to the number of users. A small forum can handle a few. A huge site--YouTube or LiveJournal, for instance--can support hundreds.

The number of trolls that can comfortably troll without overwhelming the user base and causing them to go into hiding is also regulated by the attachment of users to the community. The more invested the regular users are, the more likely they are to try to ride out the troll invasion. And, as they stick around, they adapt to it, which makes them less likely to leave if additional trolls arrive.

When planning a group operation, you need forerunners to probe the community. Just a couple of troll accounts to test the waters and see how reactive the herd will be to your presence. I recommend obvious trolling in this situation, which tests not only the community, but the tolerance of the moderators. Establish the operating parameters for the site, learn what behaviors will get you banned and what kind of protective measures the site has in place.

With some groups--conspiracy theorists, white supremacists, pedophiles, political and religious extremists--their communities tend to be paranoid to the extreme. For these, you need to blend in. Observe what you can on websites, learn their lingo and opinions. Most of these groups will require manual processing of membership. Some may even require you to correspond with them via email before they grant access to their groups. It's important that you can pass.

The advantage of paranoid groups is that they're all paranoid so they won't require any actual proof of identity. Their membership would never tolerate it. Instead, they rely on how they feel about you, whether you act like one of them.

During your advance operations, you should be documenting the fuck out of the target. Work out the old dramas that can be leveraged, establish the volatile personalities which will be the primary source of lulz. Learn individual triggers and triggers for the community as a whole.

Once you've established a beachhead, it's time to spread the word and tell other trolls where to find the lulz. It helps to establish an IRC channel for real-time communication during operations, as well as having someplace for more extensive documentation and planning. Really big operations often have dedicated sites. Smaller operations usually work out of a forum or a chan.

In communities that have not been trolled before, there is a persistent belief that the trolls come from within, usually a former member with several sock puppets. This is to your advantage; they will virtually troll themselves as they react to who they believe you are, and as long as they believe you are a known quantity, it gives them a false sense of security. If you pay attention, they'll save you a lot of work digging up past drama.

The belief that a group of trolls is a single person confers and additional advantage: they underestimate the scale of the invasion. Two or three obvious, active trolls will keep them distracted and the rest can slip in the back, masquerading as legitimate newbies and using the information that has been gathered earlier.

Ask a Troll: Your questions, please.

2010-04-19T07:48:00.003Z

There's a lot of confusion and misinformation and disinformation out there and I'm doing my part to make one corner of the internet a little less murky. This is your opportunity, gentle readers, to ask your questions about trolls or trolling, and have them answered. What do I eat for breakfast, did I really have sex with your mom, what are my plans for world domination... whatever you want to know.

If you're afraid of me (or afraid of your friends finding out you aren't afraid of me), anonymous comments are open.

Once I've got some questions, I'll write a Q&A style post.

And what do we do with witches?

2010-04-16T20:15:00.004Z

You'll all be glad to know the spirit of the witch hunt--that archaic ritual you associate with musty history books and big-haired Puritan ministers--is alive and well on the 21st century internet.

The targets are the same: the outsiders, the misfits, the loners. Easy prey. Back in the day, it was old women and retards.

It's not always a troll that sets off a witch hunt. In communities already filled with paranoia and distrust, just the suspicion of a troll can start the ball rolling. Usually, the suspicion is that the "troll" is one of their own and the witch hunt is dedicated to outing the person.

As the witch-hunt spirals out of control, the community will turn on itself. Innocent users are branded as sock puppets and pilloried while the hunt attempts to ferret out which hand is up their behinds. It becomes dangerous, in an internet way, to stand too close to any of the accused. Anyone that does risks being caught up in the drama.

People don't know what's going on exactly, but the "right" side is definitely the one that talks a lot about truth, justice, and apple pie. And if they also take the attitude that any measures are acceptable in their mission to drive out the undesirables, well, you gotta break a few eggs.

A few genuinely decent people will see the witch hunt for what it is, bullying by a small number feeding mass hysteria. They'll speak up, because "all that is required is for good men to do nothing." And most of them will be labeled witches (or, updated for the internet, trolls) for their effort. A portion of them will end up so disgusted by what they see, they'll leave. Usually quietly and without fanfare. Just fade away, leaving the community to roil in its own drama.

A witch hunt never affects an actual troll. It's just more online drama, ranging somewhere from amusing to tedious. The real effect of a witch hunt is to sow discord and deeper paranoia in the community, to cause rifts and deepen suspicion, and most of all, to erode the boundaries for what is acceptable. If it's okay--necessary, even--to post information about where someone's kids go to school because that person is a "troll", it quickly becomes okay to do it to people, even long-standing users, because they protest. And, after them, the users that refuse to participate in the witch hunt and therefore must side with the troll. And after the "trolls" are gone, it's too late--extreme escalation has become de riguer in any disagreement.

Of course, they blame the trolls.

What they don't see: In this instance, they are the trolls.

Trolling with Identity: Impersonation

2010-04-11T09:34:00.008Z

On the internet, anyone can be anything. Rich, beautiful, young, sexy, an anonymous toad. Online identity is a confluence of who we actually are and who we wish we could be. We name ourselves. We can be, simultaneously, people that we aren't at all, and our deepest, darkest selves.

It's also a tenuous thing. We are identified by our chosen names, the pictures we use to represent ourselves, our attitudes. Mostly, we are identified by who we say we are.

So what happens when we say we're somebody else?

Impersonating a user is a trusted drama-generating technique used to sow confusion in an online community. Because so much of our online identity hinges on just a few pivotal things (username, avatar) it becomes incredibly easy to represent yourself as someone else, to confuse and misdirect.

It can be as simple as a similar name (lowercase where there is uppercase, a space or lack thereof) and most people will not notice the difference. (Except the original user, who if you have chosen your target well, will probably scream bloody murder and demand that the administrators ban fucking everyone.)

Luckily, I don't have to rely on hypotheticals to explain the concept.

Take a good look at my blog. The background. The graphics, the sidebar, the URL.

~~Now look at this one.~~ For some reason, Rick/Des/Jobo took down this excellent example. Oh well. Just imagine a blog that looks a lot like this one with a URL that's only one letter different. And nowhere near as awesomely written.

If you're familiar with my blog and you followed a link expecting to end up here, and you ended up at the second one, how long would it take you to notice that you were at the wrong place? (Hey, everybody give a big thanks to Des Harcus/Rick Lennie/Jobo Pooks for all the hard work he's put into providing me with real live example.)

The result is supposed to be outrage and indignation on my part. Ideally I should be spamming the everloving fuck out the forums I frequent, alerting everyone to the fact that out there on the internet is an imposter, someone pretending to be me.

Unfortunately for Des/Jobo/Rick, he has the right idea, but the wrong target.

Trolling by impersonation works best on two groups. The first consists of people who use their real names and pictures, essentially translating their offline identity onto the internet. Sites like facebook and communities that stress using your offline identity as a type of legitimacy are tasty drama buffets because the line between internets and real life is so blurred.

The other group that makes a good target is long term users of a community. They've established identities and roles within their community, and they have "reputation" that they believe will be damaged by the impersonator.

So, above and beyond the fact that I'm a troll, Rick/Jobo/Des made a fundamental error in target selection: I am not using a real world identity and I am not invested in this particular online identity, which means I give fuck all about its reputation. (If anything, every time someone pretends to be me, they're doing me a gigantic favor by muddling things up just that much more. Now, if you've been paying attention, you should all be wondering a) am I really Jobo/Rick/Des and/or b) if he actually had anything to do with the second blog, or I'm just saying that. This will be on the quiz.)

Generally speaking, though, applied to a NORP, the desired effect would have occurred.

Impersonation doesn't have to be as elaborate or time consuming as setting up and maintaining a fake blog, and the blog impersonation also has one other main point of failure: trolling by impersonating someone is primarily effective in a community. Part of the troll is the confusion it creates as members try to figure out which one is "legit." For it to work with the fake blog, a bunch of my readers would have to not have the site bookmarked and accidentally type in the exact wrong address that the fake one uses.

Most of the time, a few minutes invested in creating an account and a posting rampage on a message board will create a much bigger splash because it strikes at the heart of what generates the anxiety: the reputation of the user's identity in a specific community.

The optimal time to utilize this technique is when boards are less moderated; weekends, holidays, and evenings for commercially maintained sites. The opposite for hobby sites. The lulz to time invested ratio is maximized by how long your posts and fake user remain before a moderator comes along and cleans up after you.

To maximize confusion, create a profile very similar to the original user's. Link to their sites, use their picture. If you've been observing the community for any period of time, you should know some of your target's mannerisms. If they're a long term user or maintain a consistent identity across multiple sites, Google will also be your friend as community members ask you questions that "only the real User X would know."

You get bonus points if you manage to convince more than half of them that the genuine user is the imposter.

King of the Hill

2010-04-08T20:44:00.008Z

There's a hierarchy in online communities, just as in real life. Over time, users make a place for themselves. They serve a function in the social machine. They develop cliques and castes (but that's a topic for another post--somebody remind me later). They all know their place.

It's daunting for new users to assimilate. Young communities tend to be friendly, easier on newcomers, because they were just new themselves not too long ago. Older, established communities are more hostile to new people, derisive of their fumbling attempts to integrate. There's a lot of eye rolling and snide remarks designed to cut down the noob and make sure he knows his place is at the bottom of the social ladder. There's more suspicion as they try to make sure the newcomer is the "right sort".

Some people say, "These people are dicks," and head for warmer climes, others take their lumps and eventually make a place for themselves.

We're not talking about something physical here--we're talking about roles. About their place in the community. The flirty chick. The father figure. The peacemaker. The black guy. There are community specific roles, dictated by the common interest the group is formed around. The 80's punk trivia guy. The writing guru.

But what happens when the role a newb decides to stake out as their own already belongs to someone else?

Drama.

You're as surprised as I am, I know.

If it's a normal user trespassing on someone's (self) appointed role, the torrents of territorial posturing (usually accompanied by derision and belittling the newcomer) coupled with the new user's lack of close ties that could generate community support, is usually sufficient to run them off. Or at least cow them so they know who's alpha in the situation.

It's a bit different when it's a troll that has come along.

Online communities usually come with their own long-standing "trolls." These aren't real trolls--they're users who have made their "thing" being controversial, brash, abusive, offensive. They're long-term community members that the rest have grown to tolerate. Some interact with them, some avoid them.

Then a real troll arrives.

Suddenly the attention that was previously awarded the pseudo-troll user goes to the real troll. And the real troll generally does the things the pseudo-troll did, but better. And some things the pseudo-troll never did at all. It's like the difference between a really good hooker and your wife.

The pseudo-troll will generally try to drive out the troll using the same tactics that have worked on newcomers in the past. The amount of arrogance assumed in this situation is directly proportional to how long the user has been filling the role. It won't work this time because angry, defensive users are playthings for a real troll.

The pseudo-troll will continue to escalate, resorting to troll tactics like attempting to drop docs. The important thing to keep in mind here is that no matter how trollish they look, this is personal. Once it becomes personal, you can, in fact, troll a "troll."

As the tantrums become more pronounced and it becomes apparent to the rest of the community that their former rebel is acting like a butthurt sixteen year old girl, they begin to lose respect. The downward slide gains momentum, causing the pseudo-troll to struggle harder to maintain their position. It becomes self-reinforcing.

If you find yourself in the position of dealing with one of these, it's important to temper yourself. The inclination is to go balls out and take the poser troll apart, but that will lose you community support. Since the poser is one of their own, you first need to gain their sympathy. Play it cool and let your adversary do most of your work for you. He's the one with something to lose when you show them the emperor has no clothes.

Crossing Lines

2010-04-04T08:59:00.005Z

By now the whole internet has seen the Today Show excerpt where they discuss trolling the grieving families of children who have committed suicide. If you've been in a coma for the past week, it's embedded here:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I've said before that trolling is an individual pursuit. What fascinates one troll and draws their interest is boring as fuck to another. I don't have any interest in trolling grieving families, it's just not my thing. But I can understand why it draws attention.

There's something abhorrent about making grief into a public spectacle. I'm sorry for anybody that loses anyone they love. It sucks even more when it's a kid. But why would you choose to turn it into a media frenzy? Putting up facebook pages and talking to the press and shit? People who never met the dead person don't have a stake in this. They don't care. Most of the time, this behavior fades into obscurity.But if the story is good enough, or if it's a slow news week, it gets more attention than it deserves.

First comes the supporters, people that co-opt the pain of the family and friends, latching onto the death to feed their own need for tragedy. They leave heartfelt comments on internet tribute pages. If they have really empty lives, they might even send condolence cards or flowers to the family of someone they've never met. Those vultures aren't considered creepy, even though what they're thriving on is the pain of the grieving.

With all the "positive" attention, comes the negative. In a culture that fetishizes celebrity, there are the adoring fans. There's also the flip side: mocking and criticism. Haters, in internet parlance. Some of it's just drive by commentary. Other people are alienated by the media circus.

When someone decides to cross the line between private and public and make their life--or their grief--into spectacle, they choose media and attention and fifteen minutes of fame. They don't get to pick and choose what people are allowed to say about it. It's a package deal. The good and the bad. The love and the hate.

You can't put the genie back in the box.

The Rumpelstiltskin Effect

2010-04-03T11:08:00.006Z

There's an idea embedded deep in the human psyche that knowing something's name gives power over it. The Judeo-Christian God has an unpronounceable name and in Judeo-Christian mythology demons are banished, summoned, and controlled through the power of their names. The ancient Egyptians believed that through his name, you could dominate or afflict your enemy. Folk magic, voodoo, and wicca use names in spells to affect and control. In fairytales, names give power over supernatural creatures.

The story of Rumpelstiltskin begins with a dwarf that helps a miller's daughter spin straw into gold in exchange for trinkets and baubles and her firstborn. She agrees and lands a king as husband, but when the dwarf shows up to collect, she doesn't want to honor her bargain. She pleads to keep her child. Rumpelstiltskin offers her a chance: Three nights to guess his name. If she can, he'll relinquish his claim on the babe.

The queen fails for two nights and it appears she has lost, until a servant overhears Rumpelstiltskin crowing in the forest, a song that includes his name. The queen uses the power word, vanquishes Rumpelstiltskin, and keeps her child.

This same primitive belief in the power of names is alive and well on the internet. A culture with pseudonyms and the ability to shield one's true self makes the possession of information linked to offline identity valuable. Powerful.

People that have just enough skill with Google to give them an inflated opinion of their abilities research each other. Most people use a consistent online identity, the same nickname and profiles linking to the same websites. This makes information about who they are in the real world ridiculously easy to find. All it takes is a personality conflict on a forum somewhere and someone accessing whois for their domain name and out comes their powerword, a real life name. All drama breaks loose.

When a community realizes there is a troll in their midst, the need to uncover who is behind the screen-name goes into overdrive. Like the miller's daughter turned queen, they feel like they can vanquish the beast, if only they can speak its name. The Rumpelstiltskin effect.

Some trolls take steps to thwart this exposure: proxies, anonymizers, Tor. Their nicknames change as often as their underwear (more, sometimes, depending on how hygienic the troll in question is) to derail tracking them from site to site. They litter the path with disinformation, false but plausible details about who they are. Who they could be. (This can include everything from misleading IP addresses to the fabrication of complete identities.)

Any troll with experience knows that, despite all precautions, it's possible that one day they could become careless, and the queen will come into possession of their powerword. For some trolls, this is meaningless. If they've recognized from the beginning how thin the veil of anonymity is, it won't make a difference. The mystery of identity was just one trick in the bag. For others, it will dispel them, at least in their current incarnation.

Others troll under their real name, sabotaging use of their powerword. There's a trade off; they aren't vulnerable to exposure, but by making themselves so public, they are vulnerable in other ways. Trolls are never universally beloved. Arousing strong reactions is part of the territory. When they are denied the psychological power of naming the troll, some users will turn to other means of gaining power (which can include real world retribution).

It's important to understand, before beginning a troll, how strong the Rumpelstiltskin effect can be and how obsessed some members of an online community will become with trying to trap a troll.

Editor Worship

2010-04-02T11:41:00.006Z

Writers carry around the delusion in their hearts that what they wrote is good. This belief in their own talent, the idea that they are special, is fundamental to their nature. They're like every waitress in LA, believing they just need to serve corned beef on rye to the right table and their unmistakable talent will be noticed. They'll be discovered.

Except for writers, it's not the agent or producer at a lunch counter. It's the literary agent or the editor stumbling across them on the internet.

Every writer you encounter putting their shit online is doing it for their ego. Ignore the false modesty, the ones that say "Oh, I don't think it's any good but I'm posting it because someone might enjoy it." It's bullshit. They're fishing for compliments. This ego is exactly what makes them susceptible to what I call Editor Worship.

You can combine Editor Worship with an impersonation troll, and use the name of a well known agent or editor, or openly claim association with a major literary agency or publisher. It might lend some initial credibility, but the lulz will be short lived. You'll get shot down pretty fast as some enterprising sleuth verifies that you're a fraud. (Note: this is not necessarily a bad thing, it will generate a lot of drama when you're outed.)

Another option is to create an account that signifies your professed profession. Call yourself "Line Editor" or "Anonymous Agent" and start with a helpful post introducing yourself and your credentials as an agent or editor. Don't be specific. Say with a "major publisher" or "respected agency." You can always drop names later to a gull who will spread it to the community.

There's a ready-made excuse for your unwillingness to disclose details. Who wants to be bombarded with a barrage of badly written Twilight fanfic opuses? Yeah, not even real agents.

Offer to help.

Writers will endure obscene amounts of abuse at the hands of what they believe are publishing professionals. You don't have to know what you're talking about. They won't question you. Even if they have their doubts, they'll keep their mouths shut, just in case you're for real.

Remind them that writers are disposable, a dime a dozen. That agencies and publishers have no interest in working with argumentative divas (defined as anyone that doesn't kowtow to you). Let them know that there's an unofficial blacklist, circulated amongst agencies and publishers, effectively barring certain "problem" writers from the industry. Tell them they don't want to be on that list.

If one of the writers disagrees with whatever shit advice you're giving or treats you in a manner less respectful than your exalted station deserves, use the trump card:

"My agency/house was going to offer you a contract, but your behavior is highly unprofessional."

There's an 80% chance they fall all over themselves trying to win back your approval. Plus it's an example to the others.

The beauty of Editor Worship is that you can control a community as their expert-in-residence because you represent the fulfillment of their deepest desires. Happy trolling.

The Game Plays On

2010-04-01T09:36:00.004Z

Last night the clock clicked over and now LOLthonomy is settling down for another month. The top five are digging in their heels and preparing to hold on tight. Six through ten are mounting their offensive.

My Sock Sleeper Cell assessment was wrong. It appears they were put into play to maintain the status quo rather than to put in a dark horse at the last minute. I bet Frank McGrath is pissed since without their sudden interference, he'd probably have held onto the desk until midnight.

The Sock Army is still growing and they're building TSR right now. You'll see them come into play near the end of the month, just like you saw them come into play for Every Atom Belonging. My guess is this month they'll come out for Euphoria if it looks like it's in jeopardy, based on some of the shelving. New socks registered yesterday evening include:

This is a great sample because you can see how it's being accomplished.

I'll explain.

Because Authonomy uses a unique identifier for each machine, and not an IP based system, multiple accounts can't shelve the same book from the same machine. (In theory, I'll talk more about why and how I think someone has cracked this in another post.) What I see here is someone that has access to a few computers. Probably two or three in the same household, plus maybe at work.

The socks are all shelving low ranked books in the hope that they'll get a boost from some people looking to pump up their TSR and choosing the same books the socks have. They're feeding each other's TSR as much as they can, so you see some identical shelves. Right now, they're baby socks with shit TSR so they need to lay low and bulk up.

As an afterthought, based on some of the names, I think it's a good thing Jo Ellis was in 4th place rather than 5th. There's a definite anti-Australian flavour and some Jo-specific hating going on. If Jared hadn't been blocking her fall, my guess is the socks would have tried pushing her off.

I look forward to seeing if my predictions are on target this time, and also if Authonomy will begin a sock-hunt or change their software to block the army.

Comments are open for speculation and discussion.

UPDATE: It's come down through the grapevine (how junior high is that?), that someone wants me to censor my speculation that these socks might come out for Euphoria.

My response: Um. No.

But I will clarify. I don't mean that the people with the books supported by the sock army are involved. It could be an enthusiastic friend. It could be somebody just getting off on the power of manipulating the top books. My speculation is based on the books I saw on the shelves of the socks.

There's an important word here: speculation. If you don't know what it means, fucking Google it.

Also, my email is on the sidebar and anonymous comments are allowed. Do your own asking in the future kthxbye.

The LOLercaust is coming to Authonomy.

2010-03-30T10:10:00.000Z

Anyone that was awake on Sunday night got to watch a little trial run of what I'm calling the Sock Cell Army. Books on the Editor's Desk were up and down like drunken high school cheerleaders at a frat party orgy.

That's what I was talking about in my previous post.

There's definite evidence of one Sock Cell Army and speculation from anonymous sources suggests there may be more lying dormant. Yours truly has been busy in the bowels of Authonomy attempting to document the situation. None of this wink-wink-nudge-nudge crap from the forum. Here, we're going to lay it wide open on the table.

~~There are a lot of sudden deletions from the ranks of my suspected sock soldier rolls. At the rate Authonomy moves, deletions occurring so fast suggest they may know what's up.~~ That a lot of them are still there suggests they don't know the full extent. (Hat tip boys, keep your guard up.)

Here's a partial no-more list: Boccocchino, BugsySeigal, Bunkam2, lunia, Bonnie and Clyde.

EDIT: Due to typos and general fail on my part, the deleted list is much shorter than previously thought, leading me to revise my earlier suppositions. I don't think they're paying attention.

What is more interesting is the set with mid-thousands TSRs all sporting shelves that have been blanked in the past day, and thank you messages for backing sirroco.

My suspicion is that they're the socks used in the Sunday night shenanigans, and the shelves have been blanked to hide their involvement. The socks themselves probably won't be useful again in this particular attempt to manipulate the rankings, but the General of the Sock Cell Army doesn't want to lose them if he (or she) can help it.

Here's that (incomplete) list: BakerBoys, BillyGoatsGruff (nice one), Boojum, Brahms, Buskers, CharlesLong, ChrisGantry, CousinBrucey, JimmyDean, JohnKiernan, SoupySales

There are still a bunch of accounts out there. Here's the pattern:

Registered within the past 10 days
TSR in the mid thousand range, most common between 1800 and 1200 (some of the newer socks are higher)
Bookshelf consists of three or more of the following: Every Atom Belonging, Sicilian Shadows, Brewer House, Sirocco Express, Moonbeam Highway
No avatar, profile, friends, books, or comments
Most of them haven't logged in since they were created and filled their shelf.

Some examples of what you're looking for (these may change as this post makes the rounds):

I deputize you all Junior Sock Cell Hunters. Go seek out Sock Cell sleeper agents and post the links in the comments.

Let's see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

NOTE: Crap, I just realized that anonymous comments were prohibited. I have rectified this grievous oversight as I realize all of you read but none of you want to be seen here. You may now comment away and keep your reputations intact.

The Art of Trolling

2010-03-28T10:36:00.000Z

"What is a Troll?"

This question gets asked a lot, mostly by newbs that see the word "troll" hurled at someone in an argument or come across it on a forum where the butthurt are whining about the troll(s) ruining everything.

I've said before what a troll is not: angry users (current or former) with grudges and a nasty streak or attention whores who would rather be hated than ignored.

I don't have the ego to think I'm defining all trolls here. It's a personal thing, subjective. I'm not into manifestos.

I see trolling as a form of performance art. It entertains, it provokes interest and discussion. Sometimes it provokes an emotional reaction; the best art always does. That reaction doesn't have to be fuzzy sunshine. Sometimes it makes you feel like you have worms in your skin and fire in your gut. At least, it should. If it's done right.

It falls to the troll to play the role of a twenty-first century court jester. The troll speaks the uncomfortable truth and levels the criticism that respectable members of online communities can't, not without damaging their reputations. The troll is a source of discomfort for some and amusement for others, and like their medieval counterparts, must stay on a narrow path.

There are hazards all around for the troll. Too restrained, and the troll becomes just another user, too excessive and they risk banishment at the whim of administrators. The lines are always changing, with the ebb and flow of the community mood.

The troll is a convenient target, and because of their nonchalance toward reputation, often sought as a weapon in feuds between users. One side thinks that by winning an ally in the troll, the troll will fight their battles for them. (This has a tendency to backfire. The trolls are on to you.)

It's not about grudges, or taking sides, or attacking users. It's about entertainment. It's for the lulz.

Trolling ain't easy.

The Kingmaker

2010-03-27T21:31:00.001Z

I promised I would talk about trolling using online identity. Well, I keep my promises.

But not right now.

As you know, Bob, I am blamed for everything contributing to the Downfall of Authonomy as we know it.

I'm such a useful scapetroll that there's a little plan in the works right this very moment, with me set up as the fall guy. They're already circulating rumors about what I'm supposed to be getting up to as a cover.

It's become impossible, on Authonomy, to get your book to the top by playing "fair." That is, by the sum of the most stringent ethical standards imposed by the various cliques with different philosophies.

It's become impossible to skyrocket to the top, period. Instead you've gotta spend the time networking and spamming and whoring out your book shelf.

Klazart is still a dirty word. In public. But a lot of "honest" Authonomites who revile him openly are thinking about his tactics. Unfortunately, they're spending between six and 18 hours on Authonomy every day. They don't have time to build up an external fan base and bring it to Authonomy.

So what's the next best thing to a real fan base supporting you?

One you whip up yourself, in the form of a sock puppet sleeper cell.

See, it works like this:

You make your sock puppets. A few here and there, while you're doing your spamming and shelving.

Then, they all shelve the same books. You stagger it. Let them build each other's TSRs. Authonomy's gotten that much more competitive since Klazart made his coup. A bunch of newbies with low TSRs won't do.

Then, when they're ready, you sweep in and they all back your book.

To make it more effective, you team up with a couple friends. You distribute the work of the sock puppet cell and you maximize the benefit to the group as a whole.

Keep an eye out in the forums for oblique posts oozing smug self-satisfaction and the hints dropping about "new techniques."

Don't say I didn't warn you.

For the record, I do think it's cheating to use sock puppets this way. So does Authonomy.

If I ever decide to put a book on the desk, I'll do it old style Klazart. With a real army.

That is all.

Trolling with Identity: An Anecdote

2010-03-25T12:11:00.002Z

WARNING: BUTTHURT AHEAD

Picture this: Authonomy, last weekend.

My whole time at Authonomy, I've been inundated with questions asking if I'm "Marcella." The Marcella in question is some user from before my time.

Weeks go by. "Are you Marcella?"

Every time I'm asked, I deny it. It just fuels the flames. They go to facebook and talk about if I'm Marcella.

Finally I start a thread. "Who is Troll, really?"

Just so they can all get it out of their systems. There's some great speculation. (Like, "The letter B.") Some grudge speculation, where someone decides I must be someone on the basis that they don't like either of us. And of course, Marcella.

Keep in mind, as I'm telling this story, Marcella is not a member of the site. She hasn't been there in I don't know how long, since she quit in a fit of butthurt to self-publish her book or something. I don't know the details, I just get the crumbs from the grown-up table.

And it's not just me that gets the Marcella treatment. Any new user with a pseudonym and an avatar of something besides their own face (y'all assuming that wasn't my face, jokes's on you) is accused of being Marcella.

So I make "Marc-Ella."

An account to highlight the Marcella frenzy. An obvious spoof, I thought. Marc-Ella said things like "Troll is not Marcella."

Again, Marcella is ancient history, except for in some people's nightmares/wet dreams.

I find out later that before Marc-Ella even happened, Marcella was
complaining to @authonomy on Twitter that Troll was impersonating her.

PROTIP: When your friends/enemies decide that someone is you, and refuse to believe you and the other person when you both deny it, that is not impersonation. Buy a fucking dictionary.

So there is a collective orgasm at the appearance of Marc-Ella. (Those users not hunkering down with blankets over their heads, waiting for it to be safe again.)

Then in on her broomstick comes Marcella. I haven't seen a hissy of this proportion since the YouTube incident of 2007. Servers trembled. Screaming, swearing, and a good measure of old grudge bile gets tossed in for spice.

So Marc-Ella promises to leave, if Marcella will crawl back under her rock. (Marc-Ella underwent a name change, and avatar change, and is rehabilitating back into a valuable member of the community as the vacation sock puppet known as Marcentipedes. In case you were interested.)

But in the meantime, someone else (kudos to you, Sir or Madam, I admire your work--email me, we'll do lunch) rips off Real Marcella's user pic from Twitter, and a couple of her tweets.

This ups the hysteria level on the part of Real Marcella to Internet Lawsuit. There is butthurt, there is black rage, there is BAAAAAAAWWWWWW! There are many lulz as she flails indiscriminately at anyone stupid enough to post while she's having her tantrum, accusing them of... something.

Of course, yours truly, being a Troll, is accused, tried, and convicted in the court of public opinion. (Which I'm okay with. You got a name like Troll, you expect these things.)

This epic ragefest is greeted mostly with confusion as users (myself included) attempt to tell Real Marcella from the fake and Real Marcella is unable to do anything to actually prove she is Real Marcella. Speculation arises that she is both Marcellas, creating more drama because she's not done with her bitch-fit yet.

After a while, Authonomy deletes the fake Marcella (which reappears the next morning, only to suffer another abrupt departure). It was pointless in the same way reality TV is pointless. Drama, entertainment, people too blinded by rage to see that they're making right cunts of themselves. I can only hope that somewhere on the internet, screenshots of this lolcow in action preserve the drama. (Email me.)

And this anecdote, boys and girls, is the introduction to my next post, which will be all about the mechanics of identity trolling.

Oh, and for the record, I'm not now, nor have I ever been, Marcella.

I'm so much cooler.

You can stop asking anytime now.

Plagiarism Panic

2010-03-20T09:25:00.000Z

It's no secret my current trolling ground is Authonomy.com. To recap: it's a large community of wanna-be writers brought together for the sole purpose of promoting their books to the Editor's Desk where, they are promised, a Harper Collins editor will read at least the first couple of chapters. I've already talked a bit about trolling the process by which books are selected, and I'll revisit it in a future post.

Today I'm going to talk about trolling writing communities in general.

Any group of people with a common interest or agenda has a built-in set of trolling points (beyond the standard clique/bully/stalking drama). Writers, especially unpublished writers with manuscripts that make your eyes bleed, are incredibly sensitive to the suggestion that someone may be profiting from their work.

Starting the Plagiarism Panic can be accomplished in a number of ways. The easiest is to locate someone's work reposted on an ad-spam or porn page. Find a couple active and prolific members with popular blogs where they post their work and search for unique phrases. You'll hit something that scraped them to improve search-engine standing pretty fast. Then post the url in the forum. Watch the resulting outrage.

If it's a password protected site that the bots don't hit, you may have to dummy something up. Grab some free web space and choose active members, the ones who've been around long enough to develop unwarranted self-importance based on the sheer duration of their association with the site. Grab some particularly lulz-worthy passages of whatever they've written and smack it up on your new site.

Rip the hell out of it. That's called criticism and protected as "Fair Use" and it will make them even angrier.

If you're masquerading as a legit member of the community, steal some of your own work and give it the same treatment. Post a link to the site, be outraged. Others will quickly flock to the site, and, like rubberneckers at a four-car pile up, the commentary will begin.

People will begin taking their work down, there will be all kinds of specious opinion given on copyright law and legal actions you can take.

Make sure you set up an email drop and post the address on the dummy site, because you'll get all kinds of outraged email demanding the removal of works and citing bizarre criminal codes. Possibly threats of physical violence, if you're really lucky. Many lulz can be had this way, but it can be time consuming to set up.

If you're in for a quick hit-and-run you can do the "allegation of plagiarism."

Set up a sock puppet and make a post warning the community about someone in their midst. You can name someone if you want and combine with the "slander and defamation" troll, or you can state that your lawyers advised you not to name anyone, but you felt the community deserved the warning that there is a viper in their bosom.

If you don't name anyone, give hints to the identity like "a long term member." Let them go nuts trying to figure out who it is.

A few people will point out that you're just causing trouble (which you are) but the plagiarism allegation usually starts a stampede that overwhelms the voices of reason. You can always pop in as a second sock to back up the first. A second party to the law-suit, for instance.

Another plagiarism related troll is the defense of plagiarism. Helene Hegemann is a hero to trolls everywhere for her "mixing" defense of plagiarism. For a quickie that will generate heated opinions, just cite Hegemann and ask if the information age has modified what it means to plagiarize. Promote the position that everything is fodder for the artists.

Quote Picasso: "Bad artists copy. Great artists steal."

You'll have to defend the position alone for a little while, but then a couple lazy-ass shit writers looking to morally justify theft will pop up. Let them take it and run with it. Enjoy the lulz.

There's an endless source of lulz in bringing up plagiarism with writers. It's a perennial favorite, the "abortion" of writing circles.

Dropping Docs meets Internet Muscles

2010-03-19T17:03:00.000Z

God I love the smell of drama in the morning.

Dropping docs, in internet parlance, is the posting of publicly available information about someone that they believed was private or hidden. Usually a real name, sometimes an address and phone number. Some people consider something as minor as linking to their blog or facebook profile dropping docs and proof of obsessive stalking.

Anyone who has spent more than fifteen minutes on the internet understands how patently ludicrous this is.

The reality is that it takes about five minutes to locate docs on the average joe and it can be done from the comfort of your living room. Less if you have more than about thirty brain cells. Under a minute if they use their real name. Whois is your friend. So are reverse lookup directories and online public records databases.

Dropping docs is a standby drama-generating technique. Nothing winds someone up faster than referring to them by their first name if they believe they haven't publicized it or asking them how the weather is in Derbyshire. Nothing.

The most obvious reason to drop docs is just to stir up some shit with a mommy blogger or a YouTube Hero. Bonus if you can dredge up their DUI.

The more subtle reason is the counter-troll.

There's a lot of confusion out there about what constitutes trolling. Every time someone is crass, opinionated, argumentative, or abrasive, whatever community they're currently plaguing applies the label "troll." Most of these people aren't trolls; they're just assholes.

And most of these assholes like to hide behind what they suppose is anonymity: a name they've used on every site they've ever been banned from, linked in multiple profiles to websites and blogs that still lurk in caches. The embrace the label and begin to imagine that they really are trolls.

If you're lucky enough to find a fertile lulz orchard with one of these in residence, they're probably pissed at you for showing up and trolling what they consider their turf. The average internet asshole is a lot like a retarded football player, except he gets laid less.

It takes a bit longer to track down their docs, maybe fifteen or twenty minutes, if they've made an effort to cover their tracks. (And they probably have, unless they're a brand newbie.) But it's worth it.

You could just paste everything you've got into a post. That's more likely to get the big explosion and accusations of stalking. It's also more likely to get yanked by administrative powers that be because it's clear you're dropping docs.

Wait for a conversation where your pet asshole is flexing his internet muscles and beating his chest. Drop a detail in conversation, casually. There will be silence.

Ten minutes or more, while they decide how to handle it. They'll back off, trying to figure out where you got it from, how much you know. Most people won't even notice what just happened, but in their little lizard brains they feel like all eyes are on them so they can't take too long with their comeback.

First it'll be, "That's not me," or "You're wrong," some response intended to cause misdirection and make you doubt yourself.

Look how cool I am about it, can't possibly be me.

It's a ruse. He's scrambling around trying to figure out where your info came from. He'll test you, try to figure out what you're going to do with it. If he's smart, it may occur to him that this information could potentially fall into the hands of all the people he's been harassing for months or years and he'll back off and consider his options. Sometimes he attempts to save face by claiming to have something to do that necessitates leaving the internet.

He's lying. He's unemployed and lives in his mom's basement.

At this point you may be worried that you have frightened off this excellent source of lulz.

Don't be.

The internet asshole has one thing going for him--ego. He'll maintain a respectful distance until he's recovered his unwarranted self-importance. Then he'll be back, and he's going to be outraged that you had the gall to punk him on his home court.

At this point, you've become (in his eyes) the most important person in the online community. He's going to be hyper-focused on you. Anything you say or do, he'll be right there, posturing.

You now own him. Enjoy your lol-cow.

Shuabsolution

2010-03-17T14:53:00.000Z

Some pussy hit "report abuse" and Authonomy yanked my user drama fanfic. It is reproduced here for your edification:

It was a dark and stormy night. Puab Sharvez refreshed his screen. Right there, in brownish on white was the hated name. Abomination.

His heart beat faster, he felt a cold ball of hate in the pit of his stomach. Puab clicked on the thread: Why can't we all just get along?

Hah!

He knew it was a trick. Abomination never had anything but dirty tricks up his sleeve. Not since the time that he'd approached Puab in the pub. Offered him his heart's desire. Puab had been an innocent. Respectable, and as popular as a Muslim can be.

He'd never forget that blue face. That burning pain in his bottom as Abomination had despoiled him and Puab gritted his teeth and took it without crying out. Because at the end of it all, Abomination had promised there would be a publishing contract waiting for him.

Then it was over. Pants around his ankles, Puab had looked up, tears in his eyes. He said, "Where do I sign?"

Abomination chuckled and buckled his belt. "I'm an insurance salesman, you sap. I just cruise these writer hangouts because you're all so gullible and you'll do anything if you think it means someone will print your shitty book." He strode out, leaving Puab shocked into immobility by the deception.

Puab couldn't hold back the tears of pain and humiliation. He sobbed like a little girl, bare-assed in the men's toilet. And he swore he would find Abomination one day, and cause him the same pain that Puab had endured.

Trolling Authonomy

2010-03-16T12:48:00.000Z

For any given website, there will be different factions of users with different agendas. In MMORPGs there will be some groups devoted to roleplaying and others devoted to leveling (and of course still others devoted to giving all the other users grief). Wikipedia has more bylaws than the European Union, and Wikipedians are still fighting over what is and isn't proper use of the wiki.

No matter how mundane the site or service or how retarded the argument is, this will be a source of high drama to the core users. This is made more amusing by the fact that the users most vocal in telling everyone else the rules have no actual authority.

Cliques will spring up. They will have mission statements and pledges of conduct. There will be snide remarks made about users with a different agenda. There will be furious forum postings. Someone will drop docs. There will be threats of physical violence.

In other words, good clean internet fun.

Case in point: Authonomy.com

Authonomy is a website run by publisher Harper Collins where aspiring writers can post manuscripts and users can award points to each other's books by putting them on their bookshelf, a process called "backing." At the end of the month, the books with the most points get to be personally rejected by Harper Collins.

Harper Collins has laid out no explicit rules for determining which books a user should back. There are no limits on how many books a user can back.

Users are constantly writing long posts complaining about the backing system and, when Harper Collins wisely ignores them, they take it upon themselves to legislate the backing process.

This has resulted in site-specific terminology like "slut-backing" (backing everything in the hopes that people will back you) and "whore-backing" (a reciprocal backing arrangement).

Naturally, various factions have sprung up. Some argue that slut-backing and whore-backing are cheating, or at least unethical. Others insist that because the software allows it, it's fair play. Spam is rife as users bombard each other with messages asking for backings for their books.

They all make up their own rules about how the site should be used and what criteria should be used for backing books, and it gets even more complicated because they all have their own ideas of etiquette in response to backing. Should you thank the backer? Back their book in return?

The possibilities for drama are endless.

The easiest troll is just to pick a discussion in the forum by one of these groups discussing how best to use the site and state a contrary opinion. In short order they will be accusing you of single-handedly engineering the downfall of civilization.

You can use this troll in multiple discussions simultaneously, even offering contradictory opinions. Most of the users are so focused on their own clique that they won't even notice you've posted in other threads. Should anyone call you out, accuse them of misunderstanding your statement.

More time consuming, but ultimately more rewarding, is actually using the site in a way contrary to one or more of the groups stated preferences. For the ones that complain about backing without comments, back all their books. Do not comment. For the ones that complain when comments don't offer "critique", leave comments like "A+ BACKED!!!" or "1st chap rocked! BACKED!!!"

If you leave a comment saying a book is backed, you don't actually need to back it. The user will eventually contact you telling that the backing didn't come through on their feed. At this point, you can either make fun of them or you can say "Huh, weird. I'll do it again." Do this when the user is offline and don't actually shelve the book. They'll get back to you again and tell you they don't see it. Tell them you emailed Authonomy and they assured you that the backing did register. Give them some mumbo-jumbo about watchlists. The user won't press the issue too much because they don't know for sure you're lying. They'll probably start a thread in the forum asking if other people are having the same problem.

For the users that defend the position that no behavior is unethical as long as it allows them to reach the desk, the best way of trolling is to warn people about them. Start campaigns for ethical backing and otherwise create the impression that you are actively attempting to hinder their book's progress. Engage one of the cliques with lots of rules about returning reads in-depth critiques. They'll eventually take over the process and you can just sit back and watch.

All of these suggestions hinge on the inability of people to just use a web site without trying to control how other people use it. Authonomy is an excellent choice for watching these groups interact because the users are all competing for the same reward.

Happy Trolling.

Oh, and if you join, ~~Back my book.~~ BALEETED!