A TROLL...the online definition looks like this:
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
In my time on HockeyBuzz, I have now been banned twice for posting comments.
Once, a few years ago, during the Penguins Senators series, when I told the Senators blogger (who is no longer here) that I thought his remarks about his own player were out of line...and yesterday.
Yesterday, I posted ONE comment to a Flyers blog, by Tim Panaccio. Tim asserted, in his blog:
Arron Asham punching a defenseless player in the back of the head as he lies face down on the ice?
That's not hockey. That's assault.
My response in the comments section was:
Assault is two Flyer Fans beating up a Rangers fan in the streets after the Winter Classic.
What Asham did was bad...but it wasn't assault.
You would have said the same thing 4 years ago if Asham had done it to a Penguin.
Granted, if we agree on the definition of trolling, this could fall under the 'provoking readers into an emotional response' part of the definition...but other than that...it is not trolling.
The Flyers ARE playing the Penguins...and mopping up the ice with them I might add...so my interest in Tim's blog is clearly a reasonable one. I wasn't there simply to disrupt.
My comments are certainly not off topic or extraneous...Tim mentioned assault in his article. Are we not allowed to question or comment on that?
And although my comments might have prompted an emotional response, they were clearly within the context of the blog that was posted. I didn't go in there spouting f'bombs and calling people names.
Seriously...what Asham did was disgraceful in the eyes of many Penguin fans too.
If you go to the police and claim you have been assaulted, the first thing they will do is look at you for physical evidence.
I don't know what type of bruises Schenn has from that game, but I can almost guarantee you he had nothing from that punch Asham threw when he was laying on the ice. And obviously, he quickly returned to game action, so nothing Asham did caused any serious harm to Schenn.
Sure it looked bad...and in bad taste...but you don't get charged for assault because you look like an idiot...do you?
I mean if that's the case...and that kind of hit deserves to be labeled assault, then the league had better review about 1,000 other incidents in the past year alone.
As much as I don't like how Brad Marchand falls to the ice every time he gets touched...he got a stick in the groin yesterday that clearly would be assault under the guidelines Mr. Panaccio is proposing.
For that matter, if that's assault, I have seen hundreds of cases of assault in men's senior league ice hockey.
I guess my biggest problem with it is this:
If you post a blog and call something assault...and know that the other team's fan base is probably going to read it...aren't you LOOKING for a response in the first place?
I mean, when the Penguins gooned it up on Sunday, don't you think they were looking for a response?
Doesn't the initial blog, fall under this defintion:
with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response
And when a reader does respond...with an answer you might not like...but none the less on topic...you should ban them?
That's silly...and bad for business.
I understand that people hate the Penguins...our secret agreement with Gary Bettman...Mario 'the Hypocrite' Lemieux...Cindy Crysbaby...etc...and they are happy to see the implosion that happened the other day in Philly.
Believe me, the Penguin fans everywhere (and here on Hockeybuzz) feel the brunt of that display because now we have every TROLL that doesn't like the Penguins (for one or more of the reasons above) slamming the team left and right.
For the most part...we just have to take it...and our moderators have been pretty fair with the people who are or would be trolls...allowing a good deal more interaction and heated discussion than anything I posted in ONE reply to the Flyer's blog.
While I can understand how the incident that occurred after the classic is a touchy subject with Flyer fans, it can't be ignored or forgotten about, can it?
I mean, if we all play by the SAME rules, and if what Sidney Crosby did when he was 19 can't be forgotten, how can we forget what happened this past January?
And if a Flyer's blogger is going to call what Asham did assault, then they should at least allow a valid response to that claim in the comments section, shouldn't they?
Apparently not. Apparently it gets a person a site wide ban from commenting to blogs.
Thanks for reading!!!