Talk:Sysops are trolls

I have to say that I don't see any sense in this article, but otoh who'd expect something to make sense in these times. --Juxo 21:15, 25 Jan 2005 (EET)

First, stop censoring talk. It is rude.

Second, there is MUCH dispute about "what is a troll" and "what are the rightful powers of a sysop". Notably Larry Sanger had a lot to say on this just recently. And w:Wikipedia:troll and w:Internet troll and so on, leave LOTS of doubt as to what the hell this word means.

As for the distinction:

It matters mostly because, if sysops are trolls, then it is not a requirement for trolls to avoid technological escalation, and so, such trolls nest tactics as SOLLOG POV warriors use at wikipediasucks.com are fair game. If sysops are not trolls, however, then the distinction between them must be this use of technology the other side doesn't have (vandalbot, delete page and undelete page), and so true trolls would then be obligated not to use it, or else they'd drop to the moral level of sysops. The distinction is a moral one, mostly: Can trolls behave like sysops without becoming just as bad?

The distinction would clarify whether sysop vandalism is a subset of troll vandalism, or if they are totally separate things that have a dialectic or tension with each other. If they have such tension, then sysops might be able to collaborate with trolls on some important issues like getting Consumerium governance properly defined.