Skip to main content

The Affable Thread

Hmmm. Interesting topic. Defintion of trolling has changed and does change constantly due to personal agendas and how they are viewed.
Id suggest its repeatative posts. Nonsensical devoid of addressing subject matter posts. Posts for the sake of posts.
Boring attention seeking nothing posts which add zero to discussion except to illicit a response. Which is very very sad. When no words are of value anymore except to invoke a response . And nearly always poorly executed cos they have nothing to offer. To argue, discuss or explore.
But im most probably wrong. I defer to the trolling experts.
The sign of someone trolling is when they can't elaborate or substantiate an argument when they are challenged.

Instead they just repeat the same type of talking points.

But if someone can explain and back up their views with logic then they shouldn't be labelled a troll just for having a different opinion from the majority.

I think it's easy to work out who's interested in having a discussion and who has other motives!
 
The sign of someone trolling is when they can't elaborate or substantiate an argument when they are challenged.

Instead they just repeat the same type of talking points.

But if someone can explain and back up their views with logic then they shouldn't be labelled a troll just for having a different opinion from the majority.

I think it's easy to work out who's interested in having a discussion and who has other motives!

Hmmm.

I am unsure whether that is trolling either. Sometimes it is the one challenging the person making the argument who is the actual troll. It is hard to tell in my opinion and I have learnt over time not to label a person as a troll anymore as it is difficult to tell if that is their intention.
 
The sign of someone trolling is when they can't elaborate or substantiate an argument when they are challenged.

Instead they just repeat the same type of talking points.

But if someone can explain and back up their views with logic then they shouldn't be labelled a troll just for having a different opinion from the majority.

I think it's easy to work out who's interested in having a discussion and who has other motives!
That isn't trolling. That's just being lazy
 
Hmmm.

I am unsure whether that is trolling either. Sometimes it is the one challenging the person making the argument who is the actual troll. It is hard to tell in my opinion and I have learnt over time not to label a person as a troll anymore as it is difficult to tell if that is their intention.
I agree that it's hard to understand intentions. Probably depends on the person's history. But I'd find it unusual if someone suddenly starts rapidly posting talking points that are ideologically on the opposite side of where they usually are on political issues. Of course people can evolve politically but that often happens very gradually. If the person can't explain themselves when challenged then I start to think there's other motivations.
 
I agree that it's hard to understand intentions. Probably depends on the person's history. But I'd find it unusual if someone suddenly starts rapidly posting talking points that are ideologically on the opposite side of where they usually are on political issues. Of course people can evolve politically but that often happens very gradually. If the person can't explain themselves when challenged then I start to think there's other motivations.

Agreed with that. I think inconsistency is a sign of trolling if you change your views (particularly political) without justification.

Your point about elaborating or substantiating an argument is where I disagree a fair bit. Sometimes when I am challenged, I do not respond to the comment to avoid confrontation or an argument. I think replying to such a post would be considered a stronger example of trolling as it would be seeking an argument.

Additionally, I don’t feel like I have to justify myself and don’t feel that anyone else needs to either. We all have our opinions on certain topics which need to be respected.
 
Agreed with that. I think inconsistency is a sign of trolling if you change your views (particularly political) without justification.

Your point about elaborating or substantiating an argument is where I disagree a fair bit. Sometimes when I am challenged, I do not respond to the comment to avoid confrontation or an argument. I think replying to such a post would be considered a stronger example of trolling as it would be seeking an argument. Additionally, I don’t feel like I have to justify myself and don’t feel that anyone else needs to either. We all have our opinions on certain topics.
But forums are about arguments imo.
 
But forums are about arguments imo.

I disagree. I think people who seek arguments on forums are trolls. You can express a different opinion to others, sure, but if you are intentionally seeking an argument and trying to convince others to agree with your view, that is a whole different story.
 
I disagree. I think people who seek arguments on forums are trolls. You can express a different opinion to others, sure, but if you are intentionally seeking an argument and trying to convince others to agree with your view, that is a whole different story.
I don't seek arguments, arguments seek me.
 
Agreed with that. I think inconsistency is a sign of trolling if you change your views (particularly political) without justification.

Your point about elaborating or substantiating an argument is where I disagree a fair bit. Sometimes when I am challenged, I do not respond to the comment to avoid confrontation or an argument. I think replying to such a post would be considered a stronger example of trolling as it would be seeking an argument.
You have elaborated on your views many times and have been consistent so I know you are not trolling even if you do not always respond. Not everything should be responded to.

But if someone goes on a posting spree that is ideologically out of character and never really explains then I do question the intentions behind that. Especially if the posts are talking points that I've seen by other people on social media. I start to think they're not actually posting their own views.
 
You have elaborated on your views many times and have been consistent so I know you are not trolling even if you do not always respond. Not everything should be responded to.

But if someone goes on a posting spree that is ideologically out of character and never really explains then I do question the intentions behind that. Especially if the posts are talking points that I've seen by other people on social media. I start to think they're not actually posting their own views.
You haven't been here long enough to know the characters of posters here. I mean I've been here seven years and I still wouldn't be so arrogant as to say if someone here is ideologically out of character or not.
 
You have elaborated on your views many times and have been consistent so I know you are not trolling even if you do not always respond. Not everything should be responded to.

But if someone goes on a posting spree that is ideologically out of character and never really explains then I do question the intentions behind that. Especially if the posts are talking points that I've seen by other people on social media. I start to think they're not actually posting their own views.

Agreed. Someone on a posting spree like that I would see as trolling for controversy.
 
@Isee do you think I am a troll?
I think there have been times in the past that you and reepbot have deliberately gone into threads of something you are not watching or interested in with the sole purpose of taking the thread off topic with inane comments which has been irritating and what could be consided to be some troll like behaviour but overall I do not see you as a troll. It does come back to that how do you define a troll thing but I guess to call someone a troll in my mind it has to be about consistent malice intent which you do not have. I don't believe you don't log in here each day with the plan to cause mayhem and upset.
 
@Affable

Novavax update :) transcript from interview on 3aw today - Hopefully it will be here soon for you so you can have some freedom - Hope you are coping ok in the meanwhile.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Good. I'm getting a lot of messages from young men concerned about mRNA vaccines, wanting to- Anxious wants to know what's happening with Novavax. Where does Australia stand with Novavax?

GREG HUNT:

Sure. So I actually had a meeting with Novavax Australian and international team yesterday.

I'm very hopeful that there may be the first international approval over the course of the next week, and that Australia is in a very similar timeframe. I'm hopeful that we might see some positive news before Christmas.

The TGA, our medical regulator, is an independent body, the Therapeutic Goods Administration. But at this stage, my advice is that it’s progressing well.

What does that mean? It means that we would have the first of the Novavax subject to the TGA and then Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, or ATAGI, approval, those two green lights in January.

And still to be determined. And they're independent regulators and advisory body, but if they give two green lights, then the January rollout is the expectation.

And there is a sizable group of people, we think, whether it's one per cent, whether it's more than that, that are waiting for Novavax.

I think that direction is positive. Paul Kelly’s advice this morning, Chief Medical Officer, the best vaccine is the one you can get. Don’t wait, but nevertheless we recognise the reality of it, and that will add to the vaccination rate.

NEIL MITCHELL:

Could Novavax be used as a booster?

GREG HUNT:

Potentially, and that was what was the advice yesterday, and that was what Paul said today.

There’s no theoretical barrier to it, but they would need to apply for that. And I did encourage the international board, or senior leadership of Novavax to put in an application if they believe that there’s strong evidence, and that would be assessed in Australia.

So it's always been presumed that what's called a protein vaccine, think of it as three vaccines. Protein, Novavax; viral vector, which is AstraZeneca; and then the MRNA, Pfizer and Moderna, that the protein could make a very good booster.
 
I think there have been times in the past that you and reepbot have deliberately gone into threads of something you are not watching or interested in with the sole purpose of taking the thread off topic with inane comments which has been irritating and what could be consided to be some troll like behaviour but overall I do not see you as a troll. It does come back to that how do you define a troll thing but I guess to call someone a troll in my mind it has to be about consistent malice intent which you do not have. I don't believe you don't log in here each day with the plan to cause mayhem and upset.
holy crap I just reread this and there is an extra don't in that last sentence than was meant to be there that changes the entire meaning of the sentence. I am so sorry.
 
Back
Top