An Essay by Red Quacker, Suitable for Posting and Linking:

All Essays Readily Available in Readable Format at http://www.geocities.com/iamredquacker , as I am Not Without Compassion:

To the Lackeys at the TrekBBS:

To the Vigilant Knights of the Most Noble Troll Kingdom:

To my fellow Exiled (see above) and to the World at Large:

I am Red Quacker.

For as long as I can remember, Christian has been determined to censor every word, thought and idea that he dislikes. It is not enough for Christian to disagree with, discount or ignore things he dislikes--he never feels fully secure unless he sets about to destroy it. But even with all of the power he wields on our BBS, there is one thing that can stop him: popular opinion. Although Christian's propagandists would have us believe that there are 15,000+ members and only a fraction of a percent view the QSF and MA forums (rendering them insignificant), this is not the case. Christian is one of the most insecure members of TrekBBS. Even if the number of TrekBBS members was not grossly exaggerated, Christian would continue to feel deeply threatened by public opinion.

Consider the purpose of the QSF and MA forums. Were they designed to better service the BBS members and keep the Moderators accountable? Of course not. Just look at their content. Also consider the motivations behind creating the separate MA forum--Lisa freely admits it was to hide discontent from QSF, where curious newbies might become "corrupted" whilst visiting to ask a newbie question.

In order to censor everything he doesn't like to see, Christian must first manipulate public opinion so that the public agrees with him. For the most part, this job is already done through implied bribery. People feel that by loudly agreeing with Christian, they can become a Moderator. Others have a natural instinct for sucking-up to authority. Still others are afraid to voice dissent at any time, for fear of reprisal.

But this is not enough. Christian must also find a means of systematically desensitizing the populous to their need of free speech. As always throughout history, this is done most effectively through the use of scapegoats. In many ways, "troll" could be a synonym for scapegoat. A troll is supposedly motivated by his need for attention, and to receive this he must elicit responses by posting his irrational or unconventional beliefs. A troll's job, so the myth goes, is to cause trouble. When trolls are branded as troublemakers, isn't that a fair characterization? Aren't they asking to be banned? And what is to be lost from a bunch of troublemakers who deceitfully post ideas they don't believe in anyway?

There are those who believe that Christian prefers a "hands-off" approach to the BBS, and that he only cares about his numbers: the number of hits per day, the number of members registered, the number of peanuts doled out by UGO. This is clearly not the case. It should be quite obvious to anyone with open eyes that a troll would greatly enhance Christian's numbers. First of all, a troll registers at least one account; some trolls prefer to use several at once. Trolls also increase the number of hits and posts. First, this is done because people are incited to respond to threads they would normally gloss over. Second, people check back repeatedly at the BBS to continue engaging the troll in a flamewar. This draws a great amount of attention from other members, who also check back frequently and increase the number of hits. Were Christian concerned primarily with his numbers, he should theoretically be inclined to encourage trolls, not ban them.

Christian is more greatly concerned with his other two motivations: seeing only what he wants to see, and maintaining a stranglehold on public opinion. Often, these two goals work together in a diabolical symbiosis: Christian doesn't like to see anything controversial, and the public opinion agrees with him...most of the time.

One of the most impulsive decisions Christian ever made was his decision to illegally ban me from the TrekBBS. There were two reasons he did this, and they fit perfectly with the aforementioned motivations. First, he did not like me for some reason, and secondly, he thought the public would support it. Christian was so certain that the public would support him that he brazenly admitted that what he was doing was wrong. Yet most of the public loved it, because I was a scapegoat they could all rally against. Yet Reno, crying out through the wilderness of hatred and ignorance, voiced his dissent and prophesied the Dark Times to come.

"I just hope that this is a unique decision. Please don't let it set precedence." In a later thread regarding the decision: "Lisa, surely you're not saying that criticism of the board will lead to a banning? This is unaceptable."

Yet we can see today that this sort of thing *is* widely viewed as acceptable. Has not Christian gone on a Permabanning spree, wiping out each and every member of the TrekBBS who has consistently criticized the BBS? Not exactly. First, they must be classified as a "troublemaker," who "does more harm to the BBS than good." Slowly but surely, Christian decreases the requirements for someone to earn a Permaban. It began with people such as myself, who were "uppity newbies". Eventually, it worked its way to people like Barcode and Daystrom, who were once well liked by several long-standing members of the BBS. It should be noted that there has never been any kind of widespread outrage following a Permaban. The credit goes to the way Christian slowly and steadily increases the tyranny, always keeping a watchful eye on public opinion.

And he will continue to do so. One should never think himself immune to the Permaban. Many of the people who were overjoyed when I was Permabanned are currently Permabanned themselves, or in a self-imposed exile. The only sure way to avoid a Permaban is to continually shower Christian with empty flattery, or to pitch in for a hotel room. Whether only half or all of the BBS population is eligible for the second option is as yet uncertain.

The point of the matter is that the popular definition of trolling is continually changing, depending upon what Christian feels he can get away with. You could be a well-respected, upstanding member of the BBS one day, and be cast out as a troll the next. But what about those who freely call themselves trolls? Considering the mudslinging and slandering Christian so often engages in, I feel it is necessary to put the issue to rest: Must trolling be eliminated from the TrekBBS?

I have decided that in order to present a case in favor of trolls, the most vilified, disgusting troll must be defended. However, since each Permabanned member of the TrekBBS has been demonized in different ways, it would be far more effective to take each individual negative quality of the trolls and defend them one by one.

I. Trolls desire one thing: attention. Since their motivation is so ignoble, they should be eliminated.

It may well be that a troll desires that attention be brought to his posts. However, consider the motivation that each and every member of the BBS. Is it not to bring attention to their beliefs, information, opinions, etc.? Does not Trek Nation post articles about various "news" items to bring attention to them? Who on the TrekBBS would rather people *not* read their posts? People use this "they only want attention" phrase in order to compare trolls to small children who have misbehaved. The truth is, everyone on the TrekBBS desires to be recognized, even the reader of this essay.

II. Perhaps everyone desires attention. But the troll will even accept or prefer negative attention.

Only insecure people and politicians (candidates for the position of Mod) are unwilling to accept negative attention. While most people would prefer to have praise and adulation heaped upon them, most people accept that others will not always agree with them. They should also be aware that at least one person on the TrekBBS should dislike them due to their personality. We cannot all be loved by everyone. Secondly, any enlightened, mature individual should gladly see others with opposing opinions. Perhaps they can learn something that they would otherwise not, had they only voiced their opinions to those who think exactly like them. Everyone who posts something in The Neutral Zone is fully aware that half the people reading their posts will react negatively.

III. But normal people who voice opinions desire to persuade people, where the troll does not.

Anyone who believes that they can persuade everyone to their cause is a deluded megalomaniac. People do not cast aside their own views when they go onto the internet. Does Dayton3 truly believe that he can persuade Europeans that attacking Iraq is a good idea? When a democrat and a republican battle it out in some debate, do they really believe they can win the other to their own cause? If they are intelligent, they should realize that this is not possible. So are all intelligent people with opinions trolls? The naive, who think they can change people's minds, should only they be allowed to post? You might argue that on some occasions, people with moderate views are swayed to one side or the other thanks to some skillful writer. "But plm135 changed my views on the death penalty!", you croon. But for each of these cases, I will present you with a hundred others where not a single soul was persuaded. And where is plm135 today? No, the people of the BBS state their opinions because that is what the BBS was designed for. Making use of the TrekBBS is not a punishable offense, or at least it shouldn't be.

An excellent example of this last point came from a thread in the Enterprise forum that I read only a day after September 11th, 2001. A poster in that forum posted a topic where he rebuked the posters for talking about something so trivial in the wake of such a devastating event. Another poster immediately replied, calmly explaining that by continuing to talk about the things they enjoyed, they were denying the terrorists the satisfaction of disrupting their lives. The original poster, being very reasonable and open-minded, was persuaded. He apologized and said that he saw the point, and did not want to see the country paralyzed by fear. Sound impossible? It should. That poster was Talons, a Quacker clone. How did the other people in the forum respond to this thread? Were they pleased that Talons had been converted to their way of thinking? Of course not. They simply lashed out against Talons' original post. When Talons protested that he had changed his mind and now agreed with them, he was called "an asshole". The question is: those people who lashed out against opinions Talons no longer had, were they trolled, or were they themselves the trolls?

IV. The real difference between the troll and the normal person is that the normal person believes in what he says, and the troll is dishonest.

It should be obvious to even the most naive members of the TrekBBS that people do not behave online as they do in other situations. For example, people often play the devil's advocate in order to explore other sides of an argument. People also pose hypothetical scenarios to get feedback from those with different points of view. Most often, people exhibit different sides of their personality online than in "real life". And who condemns the troll more than the Moderators and Administrators themselves, who are most often politicians, flattering Christian, pretending to agree with Lisa's outrageous policies, making nice with people they'd otherwise want nothing to do with, and somehow managing to smile through it? The political landscape of TrekBBS is more rife with dishonesty and backstabbing than the posts of any troll. A troll who pretends to be a Major Barcalow every now and again is far less dishonest than a two-faced Administrator who forms false friendships for political gain.

V. Trolls, unlike constructive posters, are motivated by the desire to disgust the rest of the BBS with crude posts.

Each of us are disgusted by different things. Shall we decide what is disgusting by majority opinion? If we did so, many of our most gifted posters would fall by the wayside. Consider the case of Skinofevil, who extensively explored the issues of gender relations. While some of our more superficial and dull-headed members were disgusted by Skin, many found his antics to be very amusing and entertaining. Skinofevil, unlike your average "constructive poster," quickly inspired a group of individuals to form a fan club. And unlike those who pretend to enjoy a Moderator or Administrator's post, what could someone possibly have to gain by sucking-up to Skin? For women of reproductive age, the answer is obvious. But what about the heterosexual males who claim to enjoy Skin's posts? Clearly, Skinofevil and those like him are not worthless as the Admins claim.

VI. The trolls are not content with one identity on the TrekBBS; they often create alternate names.

As I have mentioned, many people display different sides of their personalities and say things online that they otherwise would not feel comfortable saying. Show me a person who is online exactly as he is in real life, and I will show you a preening egotistical fool. Dennis Bailey often comes under fire for registering under his own name in order to get credit for co-writing an episode or two of TNG. Though Dennis claims he simply uses his real name "because this is the name my parents gave me," it is likely not a coincidence. If people are not the same online and off, what difference does it make if they have more than one account? Some people who hated Mandy enjoyed the threads posted by Starfish or MasterMind. Some who were revolted by Skinofevil laughed uproariously at the antics of Major Barcalow. Should the personality of each person be determined by a popular vote? And how can someone who condemns aliases go without condemning Christian, who uses Lisa's account so that he can act out his fantasy of being some kind of unseen deity?

VII. Trolls are annoying, plain and simple.

Again, different people find different things annoying. Some people think it is annoying to hear a liberal democrat post about abortion. Others are annoyed by people who can't spell correctly, or choose not to do so. Twain finds it annoying when an amateur tries his hand at writing, and they, in turn, are annoyed by Twain's condescension. Many of us consider chair-throwing, barthread boozing, spamming members to be annoying. Is T'Bonz a troll because people are irritated by her posts? T'Bonz would say that she enjoys what she does, and that if we do not like her posts, we should not read them. I would recommend a similar course of action to anyone who is annoyed by a troll's post.

VIII. Some of the trolls are seriously demented in real life, and may be dangerous.

How people behave offline is not a matter of concern to the members of the TrekBBS. Quite frankly, it is impossible to determine by a person's posts what kind of a threat they are in real life, as has been proven on countless occasions. Consider tshrike, who won the trust of susannah and LizardLaugh, two cynical Miscellaneous Moderators who no doubt considered themselves to be "good judges of character". The two had planned to meet up with tshrike in real life before he began exhibiting strange behavior. Even after this, tshrike continues to post at TerranBBS. Even after it was proven that the shrike posted under the name of MsTanaka on the TrekBBS, he still had supporters both here and at Terran.

Perhaps an even better example is that of Daystrom, who was once extremely popular, even to the point of being named "TrekBBS' sweetheart". He was later accused of stalking Barcode at an airport. Admittedly, Daystrom is not quite right, but neither, for that matter, is his "victim". Ironically, both Daystrom and his accuser were Permabanned. More ironic still is the fact that they both choose to post at the same forum, Troll Kingdom.

IX. Nothing matters but the fact that trolls are here to cause trouble.

Perhaps it is true that trolls enjoy playing a good prank now and again. What is truly the harm? There is no denying the fact that trolls make for great entertainment. Is it any wonder that the same people who Permabanned our trolls continually read their posts at Troll Kingdom? Why would they do this if they truly wanted rid of them? It seems rather odd to say "I don't want to read your filth on my BBS ever again," and then go over to their BBS to read said filth. Though probably archived by now, I once read a TerranBBS poster explain his views on why TrekBBS has gone downhill. He explained that the *main* problem was "lack of MasterMind style posters in QSF. He was the best thing about that place."

Say what you will about the motivations of trolls. But do not ignore what they bring to the BBS. Can anyone truly say that they would rather read the contents of a board filled with chatty, repetitive nonsense in Miscellaneous, contentious party lines in TNZ, and inconsequential nitpicking about Star Trek elsewhere?

I will leave you with a quote from Reno. This comes from the thread that I made under an alias immediately after Christian handed out his Permaban. I had made something of an apology, and offered an olive branch to Christian. My post was immediately responded to with a host of average, constructive posters posting about donuts. From way back in February of 2001:

"One good post, and a flock of stupid sheep. This board is doomed to a future of inconsequential posts from inconsequential sheep. Is it any wonder there are only a handful of interesting regulars now, and even these are slowly disappearing. I've had just about all my stomach can take. It's full of donuts, and I'm about to throw up."

Quack.