Trolls, or why NOU might actually be useful:

The word “troll” conjures up many interesting images. If you’re a child of the 80’s you picture a plastic doll with neon hair and a jeweled belly button. If you’re a player of a popular online game, it conjures up tusks and a Jamaican accent.  But if you’re anywhere on the Internet it probably conjures up that one person you hate on a forum you go to, a newsgroup you post on or a blog you like to visit.

You know who I’m talking about: The one guy who ALWAYS has to argue, regardless of what the topic is. It appears his whole life is built around being contrary. If you’re pro abortion? He’s anti. Although watch out, he could change his stance in two weeks if it fits his argument. You try and argue but the argument eventually devolves into the Internet version of a shouting match. Your mom jokes and the ever present “NOU” start flying.

Then there’s the other guy. The guy who just acts dumb to illicit a reaction. He types in all caps, uses the most obnoxious short hand, and has an army of special phrases. This is the kind of troll people are more likely to love- he may even gain a little cult of personality following.

What drives people to do these things? This is something I’ve really wondered throughout my tenure on this weird and wonderful place known as the net.  I’ve known some people who act like trolls just for a day and Clark Kent themselves back to their normal selves the next day.

Conversely, I’ve also known people who are so invested in their troll personalities that they’re only known for their defining characteristics as a troll. I think its part of the anonymous nature of the net that allows people to really do this.  If you know there’s going to be no repercussions, you might as well act overly obnoxious. You know you’re never going to see the person you’re insulting, what’s the point in sparing their feelings?

Now, I’m not usually one for the touchy-feely aspect of the Internet. I think people need to learn to cope and develop appropriate rhetorical strategies. However, when you’re a 14-year-old kid whose print model is a hostile environment, think of how that translates into every day life. If your primary mode of literate communication is to snipe at people and attack their beliefs and then you have to sit down in class and write a well-balanced persuasive essay? I’m not sure that’s going to go too well.

I think it’s important not to de-value the experience of learning to argue over the Internet.  Don’t dismiss the trolls- some of them are actually amazingly clever. Some of them can make more comments than just your mom jokes and “NOU”.

  I think that teachers could spend time in class  talking about trolls and the comebacks that some people use, even formulating new ones. What if you were to spend a day with your students analyzing a popular forum and identifying the people who were genuinely arguing because it was their conviction or the people who argued just for the sake of arguing the opposite point?  I feel like this could be interesting, informative, and show your students you really care about what they do in their spare time.