From Treehugger:Can Trolls Be Green?

It seems as though not very many people have been in the “holiday spirit” this past month. As I meet more figureheads in the green blogosphere, I’m also coming across quite a few trolls.
Green Trolls

For those of you who are not familiar, a troll is a generalized term used to describe the types of people that spend the majority of their time leaving inflammatory comments on a blog post with the sole purpose of eliciting a reaction. This type of person likes to create an irrational argument out of the most seemingly innocuous conversation.

I wont get into the whole psychology of anonymity (are you familiar with 4chan?), but I had thought better of our green community.

Last week, Sami Grover of Treehugger, released another response to the “green troll” situation. Rarely do I find posts that mirror my views so accurately. Please check it out.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to From Treehugger:Can Trolls Be Green?

  1. Roxana says:

    My thought on that is, if I don’t have something positive to contribute to a conversation, be it online or in person, I prefer to shut up and walk away.
    Constructive criticism is one thing.
    Leaving “inflammatory comments on a blog post with the sole purpose of eliciting a reaction” – well, those people should find a more appropriate outlet for their social inadequacy, IMO.

  2. Talking about the environment gets you flamed by both sides – the people who purposefully want to detract and confuse, and those who believe that they are being even more green than you are and then tell you off for not getting all your facts right.

    The green movement suffers more than most from ‘the circular firing squad’ syndrome where so many people detract from what others are doing, because they don’t think it is any more green than what they do.

    As these people see themselves as on a moral crusade, they actually cause more harm than the people who wish to detract from the green debate in the first place, creating confusion and detracting from the real argument.

    I have found one way to get around this problem: write well researched articles and quote sources for all facts that are given in the article. Ensure the sources are all well established scientific or governmental organisations and preferably find several sources for similar threads of information. If somebody wants to say “you’re wrong”, they then have to back up their argument with a properly thought out debate and provide sources for their information.

    Occasionally this happens, and because both people are putting forward a well thought out debate, backed by facts rather than heresay, everybody gains. What you don’t get is all the silly little arguments that have no basis in fact.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>