Troll Colored Glasses

This is a syndrome where somebody writes you off as not being a decent, honest human being, and instead sees "trolling" and manipulative conspiracies in anything and everything you write. For example, you may correct them when they misinterpret something, but they see the fact that it was not 100% clear up front as part of the alleged manipulation itself. They are connecting dots that should not be connected.

Which is why it's best to be as patient as possible with people, despite any feelings of frustration.
Discussion

Patience has a limit...for example, how many years - yes, I said years - does it take before everyone realizes that topmind is a troll? He's been at it for 5 or 6 years, and, still, some people advocate patience. BS I say... sometimes, if it looks like a troll, talks like a troll and acts like a troll, then it actually is a troll! (See WalksLikeaDuck.) What he does may be aggravating to you, but I don't think it's the same as trolling, because it seems like top is talking about what he believes, rightly or wrongly. A troll is merely out to cause trouble, and rarely is talking about what he actually thinks.

Perhaps this is merely a terminology issue, and you just need to find a different derogatory term. ;-) [I think it is a terminology issue. A "troll" used to mean an attempt to stir up shit for the fun of it. The archetype was cross-posting to alt.sex.kids and alt.survivors.incest on usenet just to watch the sparks fly. Today, most folks don't understand that meaning and apply it to someone who just enjoys arguing.]

I don't know why some of you insist I am "stubborn and unreasonable" (quoted from [material deleted] above). I have seen no slam-dunk general-domain evidence for OO advantages. The deeper I try to dig into your perceived benefits, the more it gets into pet psychology theories, and psychology is a soft science. "Stubborn and unreasonable" is mistaking personal preferences for hard sciences and universal truths. The problem is not me, but rather your subjectivity-objectivity determination techniques. Produce hard evidence, and I will go away. -- top

But if the way I phrased it offended you, then I apologize.

Perhaps next time use a fictitious personality. Seems I have grown a little sensitive over the years. -- top

You are a fictitious personality; no-one can be so obtuse and pig headed for real. You're a troll.

I am glad that TopMind has added his two cents to lots of pages on wiki. Sometimes, DocumentMode leaves it unclear that TableOrientedProgramming is in the minority. I wish that didn't happen as much, but I think there are some things to learn from it. It presents valid alternate views, and on a several occasions it has influenced my thinking for the better. No programming paradigm is the all-encompassing absolute holy grail. At least, none of the ones we have today. Instead of calling it troll or vowing to ignore it, why not take it seriously? Become engaged in honest discussion, instead of ArgumentFromAuthority or AdHominem attacks. -- MichaelSparks

I notice that those I tend to tango/tangle with actually believe in ArgumentFromAuthority. See SelfStandingEvidence. --top

No, troll, you simply dismiss any reference to the work of those Giants of the Science who have taken software development from the realm of the mystical and brought it into the light of modern engineering. You completely refuse to acknowledge that there are people who actually know what they're talking about just because their conclusions don't line up with yours. Referring to the Great Ones isn't ArgumentFromAuthority; it's a reference to actual authority. You simply pretend there is no difference.

A BookStop is often an excuse to not apply alleged knowledge gained from the book/article to a particular situation or argument. Turn the knowledge gained into specific or relevant scenarios.

What, are we supposed to do your research for you? This again? No thanks. We've had this "argument" to no end all over this board. You meet the objective definitions for troll, so we can dismiss you out of hand without risking any loss of content. TenSeven.

No, you apply what you learned to the issue at hand. Show you are smart by using your grand knowledge to make things objectively and clearly better, for example.
Moved discussion to ObjectiveEvidenceAgainstTopDiscussion
See: TrollDefinition

Contrast: SetTheBozoBit
FebruaryTwelve

EditText of this page (last edited February 22, 2012) or FindPage with title or text search