Editing Talk:New Troll point of view

I think [[Wikipedia]] sysops and [[MediaWiki]] developers are putting in considerable consideration into trying to form good practices and guidelines that keep the [[developer]]/[[sysop]] influence to the [[GFDL text corpus]] at tolerable levels. But, hey that's just me and I don't troll, I almost always use '''a''' username. --[[User:Juxo|Juxo]] 22:33, 9 Mar 2004 (EET)

:Using a username doesn't save you from being labelled "a [[troll]]".  But anyway if you are, just wear it with pride, and advance the [[New Troll point of view]] as best you can.  There is always going to be some resistance to it, and [[systemic bias]] doesn't go away just because of "trying".  I don't know what "tolerable" levels of censorship by racists and fascists are, and I might trust you, Juxo, to say what they are, but I don't trust Mr. Wales to do so.


----------------

Is the [[usual happy NPOV talk]] the opposite of the NTPOV?

----

[[w:User:Timwi]] on the [[vile mailing list]] [http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2004-June/013763.html]:

:''Any chance we can put this behind us and move forwards?''

:If we do that, it's going to happen again and again with more and more 
newbies.

:We *must* find out why newbies react in certain ways. James is *by far* 
not the only newbie who seems to think we're violating our own policies, 
or applying double-standards (I'll just copy that wording without 
actually knowing what it means). There *must* be a reason why everyone 
thinks this, and if James is willing to help us discover this, we should 
listen. Once someone becomes a Real Wikipedian�, they lose the Newbie's 
Perspective�, and then it becomes easy to think that newbies are just 
dumb and stupid.

----

The essay is a very useful snapshot from a [[New Troll point of view|new troll]] who is obviously trolling us.  Under [[soft security]] ideology he would be "harming the community" and it would be time for [[sysop vigilantiism]].  Thankfully here the established [[trolls]] should just troll back:  "the best situation is where individuals can have bad reputations, but no one can ever have a good reputation."  This is absolutely correct from the point of view of many established trolls.

It's interesting to have this essay sit in [[New Troll point of view]] itself where it may attract maximum [[trolling]] attention from New Trolls trying to figure out what to do or disagree with (if they disagreed with nothing they'd not be [[trolls]], would they?).  Initially the temptation is there to put links to [[troll-friendly]] and [[world tree]] and etc., but this shouldn't happen because that reinforces the "Old Troll point of view" over new ones.

[[Trolls]] eat philosophy rather than preach it.  There is no "Consumerium philosophy", certainly, but, there is an approach and a [[Consumerium Governance Organization]] perhaps to sanction a [[Lowest Troll]] to attempt that approach in the long run.  It is really all about having NO philosophy and just choosing only the next best step to do least harm.  

But, some people do seem to need these [[ideology]] statements to get comfort with what is going on.  This essay is a good start, and trolls will gnaw on it for a while in the dark.  Then we will write something that totally disagrees.  ;-)

----------------

This was not offensive but it's speculative and pointless.  Obviously if one takes any mass of postings one will find "contradictions between", but if the [[trolls]] refuse to say "who is who" (as they do) then there is no way to respond and leaving this here is to [[require response to hearsay]].  It's fair comment but just not as good as ending the essay on the reference to Foucault!

=== Notable individuals ===
[http://develop.consumerium.org/wiki/index.php/142.177.X.X "142"] seems to be into this philosophy (although of course (s)he would dispute the characterization of 142 as an "individual").

Note however that [http://develop.consumerium.org/wiki/index.php/142.177.X.X/Anti_Wikipedia_Rants some] of 142's positions contrast with the Consumerium pro-troll philosophy, as described above. (for example, 142 advocates excluding certain specific people from positions of power in Consumerium, which is in conflict with the community-shouldn't-exclude philosophy seen above).

Perhaps the philosophy was misunderstood here; perhaps other people contributed the contradicting parts; perhaps 142 changed hir mind; or perhaps 142 does not have stable "positions", since 142 does not consider itself an individual.

-------------

This article needs a section on how [[NTPOV]] helps identity and limit [[wiki spam]], e.g. mention of [[Bomis]].