Jump to content

St Johnstone Football Club V Glasgow Celtic Football Club 5/2/17

The Saintee

Recommended Posts

Rugster

Rugster

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, weejoeharper said:

There's been so much 'trolling' on here recently that I thought it might be good to revisit a Guardian article from 2014 that explains the psychology behind it. Why do people do it and what does it tell us about them? Personally I'd rather we had discussions than be 'sucked into' showing our base selves but in a spirit of generosity here you are:

First, trolls are more likely to display noxious personality characteristics, that is, traits that impair one’s ability to build relations and function in a civilised or pro-social way. In a comprehensive examination of their psychological profile, trolls were found to be more Machiavellian (impulsive and charming manipulators), psychopathic (cold, fearless and antisocial), and especially sadist than the overall population. Trolls enjoy harming and intimidating others, so much so that the authors of this study concluded that trolls are “prototypical everyday sadists”, and that trolling should be regarded as online sadism. This is in line with the view of trolling as a form of cyberbullying.

Second, trolling – like other forms of computer-mediated communication – unleashes people’s impulses by providing anonymity and temporary identity loss.This phenomenon, called deindividuation, is well known to psychologists and has been found to emerge in several areas of interpersonal relations, such as gaming, role-playing and crowd behaviours, particularly hooliganism. Thus even when we are not naturally sadistic, trolling may bring out the worst side in us, by lifting the moral constraints and social etiquette that regulates our behaviour in normal situations, and by fuelling dissent and triggering abrasive reactions.

Third, trolling is a status-enhancing activity: by attracting readers’ attention, upsetting people, sparking heated debates, and even gaining approval from others, trolls can feel important, perhaps much more than they are in their real lives. Thus trolling is yet another internet activity that promotes narcissistic motives, since trolls may be expected to be far less successful in attracting people’s attention in the physical world. The only effective antidote to their tactics is to ignore them, but even then trolls won’t suffer a public humiliation because nobody knows who they are. This is what makes trolling so ubiquitous – it requires no skills other than the ability to be obnoxious.

So, how can trolls be managed? As recent reviews have shown, sites, editors and authors can take concrete measures to minimise trolling. Disabling anonymity, moderating comments and banning offenders, as well as predicting whether an article is likely to promote trolling, are all effective steps.

End of Article

Personally I think we should take the bull by the horns and deal with the offenders. Discussion is not all about one-upmanship, smart arse retorts and put-downs. Why can't we adopt a new method of dealing with trolls which involves disabling anonymity? Is it against the rules?  Let's call them out!

 

 

 

 

(Taken from the Guardian Newspaper, full article here, https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/sep/18/psychology-internet-trolls-pewdiepie-youtube-mary-beard. All bold is mine).

 

WTF is this shit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 676
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Gaz FFC

Gaz FFC

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Ross. said:

Granted, the calls aren't like for like but if you are suggesting the ref is going to give all the big decisions to one team then surely the linesmen must be in on it too?

I think the "Tend not to matter" comment is probably the biggest issue. The resource gap means there is a quality gap. Even with a bit of luck/favour from the refs, the odds are still against you.

I don't think wee teams fans think the ref and his 2 linesmen go out on the pitch wi a plan to give everything to Celtic/Rangers. It just tends to materialise that they get put under pressure from the crowd.

To be fair to Celtic and Rangers it also happens in England where the likes of Man U fans can intimidate a ref into being generous.

I can remember Alan Shearer on MOTD saying "Alan Shearer doesn't get penalties at the Stretford end" 

I don't mind the ref being conned into a decision by a dive or something where you can easily see why he thought it was a penalty/red card. What I can't stand is when the ref clearly isn't in a position to give a decision so takes a guess at what may have happened. Give it to the big team.

I suggest you take a look at Man Citys winner over Swansea. A foul that wasn't and a free kick taken nowhere near the offence and the ball moving too. Big teams get way more than diddy teams because referees are weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RiG

RiG

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, weejoeharper said:

There's been so much 'trolling' on here recently that I thought it might be good to revisit a Guardian article from 2014 that explains the psychology behind it. Why do people do it and what does it tell us about them? Personally I'd rather we had discussions than be 'sucked into' showing our base selves but in a spirit of generosity here you are:

First, trolls are more likely to display noxious personality characteristics, that is, traits that impair one’s ability to build relations and function in a civilised or pro-social way. In a comprehensive examination of their psychological profile, trolls were found to be more Machiavellian (impulsive and charming manipulators), psychopathic (cold, fearless and antisocial), and especially sadist than the overall population. Trolls enjoy harming and intimidating others, so much so that the authors of this study concluded that trolls are “prototypical everyday sadists”, and that trolling should be regarded as online sadism. This is in line with the view of trolling as a form of cyberbullying.

Second, trolling – like other forms of computer-mediated communication – unleashes people’s impulses by providing anonymity and temporary identity loss.This phenomenon, called deindividuation, is well known to psychologists and has been found to emerge in several areas of interpersonal relations, such as gaming, role-playing and crowd behaviours, particularly hooliganism. Thus even when we are not naturally sadistic, trolling may bring out the worst side in us, by lifting the moral constraints and social etiquette that regulates our behaviour in normal situations, and by fuelling dissent and triggering abrasive reactions.

Third, trolling is a status-enhancing activity: by attracting readers’ attention, upsetting people, sparking heated debates, and even gaining approval from others, trolls can feel important, perhaps much more than they are in their real lives. Thus trolling is yet another internet activity that promotes narcissistic motives, since trolls may be expected to be far less successful in attracting people’s attention in the physical world. The only effective antidote to their tactics is to ignore them, but even then trolls won’t suffer a public humiliation because nobody knows who they are. This is what makes trolling so ubiquitous – it requires no skills other than the ability to be obnoxious.

So, how can trolls be managed? As recent reviews have shown, sites, editors and authors can take concrete measures to minimise trolling. Disabling anonymity, moderating comments and banning offenders, as well as predicting whether an article is likely to promote trolling, are all effective steps.

End of Article

Personally I think we should take the bull by the horns and deal with the offenders. Discussion is not all about one-upmanship, smart arse retorts and put-downs. Why can't we adopt a new method of dealing with trolls which involves disabling anonymity? Is it against the rules?  Let's call them out!

 

 

 

 

(Taken from the Guardian Newspaper, full article here, https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/sep/18/psychology-internet-trolls-pewdiepie-youtube-mary-beard. All bold is mine).

 

Good post, will read again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Romeo

Romeo

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, weejoeharper said:

 

End of Article

Personally I think we should take the bull by the horns and deal with the offenders. Discussion is not all about one-upmanship, smart arse retorts and put-downs. Why can't we adopt a new method of dealing with trolls which involves disabling anonymity? Is it against the rules?  Let's call them out!

 

^^^ heads gone

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foransbeard

foransbeard

Posted
Posted
There's been so much 'trolling' on here recently that I thought it might be good to revisit a Guardian article from 2014 that explains the psychology behind it. Why do people do it and what does it tell us about them? Personally I'd rather we had discussions than be 'sucked into' showing our base selves but in a spirit of generosity here you are:
First, trolls are more likely to display noxious personality characteristics, that is, traits that impair one’s ability to build relations and function in a civilised or pro-social way. In a comprehensive examination of their psychological profile, trolls were found to be more Machiavellian (impulsive and charming manipulators), psychopathic (cold, fearless and antisocial), and especially sadist than the overall population. Trolls enjoy harming and intimidating others, so much so that the authors of this study concluded that trolls are “prototypical everyday sadists”, and that trolling should be regarded as online sadism. This is in line with the view of trolling as a form of cyberbullying.
Second, trolling – like other forms of computer-mediated communication – unleashes people’s impulses by providing anonymity and temporary identity loss.This phenomenon, called deindividuation, is well known to psychologists and has been found to emerge in several areas of interpersonal relations, such as gaming, role-playing and crowd behaviours, particularly hooliganism. Thus even when we are not naturally sadistic, trolling may bring out the worst side in us, by lifting the moral constraints and social etiquette that regulates our behaviour in normal situations, and by fuelling dissent and triggering abrasive reactions.
Third, trolling is a status-enhancing activity: by attracting readers’ attention, upsetting people, sparking heated debates, and even gaining approval from others, trolls can feel important, perhaps much more than they are in their real lives. Thus trolling is yet another internet activity that promotes narcissistic motives, since trolls may be expected to be far less successful in attracting people’s attention in the physical world. The only effective antidote to their tactics is to ignore them, but even then trolls won’t suffer a public humiliation because nobody knows who they are. This is what makes trolling so ubiquitous – it requires no skills other than the ability to be obnoxious.
So, how can trolls be managed? As recent reviews have shown, sites, editors and authors can take concrete measures to minimise trolling. Disabling anonymity, moderating comments and banning offenders, as well as predicting whether an article is likely to promote trolling, are all effective steps.
End of Article
Personally I think we should take the bull by the horns and deal with the offenders. Discussion is not all about one-upmanship, smart arse retorts and put-downs. Why can't we adopt a new method of dealing with trolls which involves disabling anonymity? Is it against the rules?  Let's call them out!
 
 
 
 
(Taken from the Guardian Newspaper, full article here, https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/sep/18/psychology-internet-trolls-pewdiepie-youtube-mary-beard. All bold is mine).
 



487b36fbdb4eeaed09ea8a40afabd06a.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Forever_blueco

Forever_blueco

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, weejoeharper said:

There's been so much 'trolling' on here recently that I thought it might be good to revisit a Guardian article from 2014 that explains the psychology behind it. Why do people do it and what does it tell us about them? Personally I'd rather we had discussions than be 'sucked into' showing our base selves but in a spirit of generosity here you are:

First, trolls are more likely to display noxious personality characteristics, that is, traits that impair one’s ability to build relations and function in a civilised or pro-social way. In a comprehensive examination of their psychological profile, trolls were found to be more Machiavellian (impulsive and charming manipulators), psychopathic (cold, fearless and antisocial), and especially sadist than the overall population. Trolls enjoy harming and intimidating others, so much so that the authors of this study concluded that trolls are “prototypical everyday sadists”, and that trolling should be regarded as online sadism. This is in line with the view of trolling as a form of cyberbullying.

Second, trolling – like other forms of computer-mediated communication – unleashes people’s impulses by providing anonymity and temporary identity loss.This phenomenon, called deindividuation, is well known to psychologists and has been found to emerge in several areas of interpersonal relations, such as gaming, role-playing and crowd behaviours, particularly hooliganism. Thus even when we are not naturally sadistic, trolling may bring out the worst side in us, by lifting the moral constraints and social etiquette that regulates our behaviour in normal situations, and by fuelling dissent and triggering abrasive reactions.

Third, trolling is a status-enhancing activity: by attracting readers’ attention, upsetting people, sparking heated debates, and even gaining approval from others, trolls can feel important, perhaps much more than they are in their real lives. Thus trolling is yet another internet activity that promotes narcissistic motives, since trolls may be expected to be far less successful in attracting people’s attention in the physical world. The only effective antidote to their tactics is to ignore them, but even then trolls won’t suffer a public humiliation because nobody knows who they are. This is what makes trolling so ubiquitous – it requires no skills other than the ability to be obnoxious.

So, how can trolls be managed? As recent reviews have shown, sites, editors and authors can take concrete measures to minimise trolling. Disabling anonymity, moderating comments and banning offenders, as well as predicting whether an article is likely to promote trolling, are all effective steps.

End of Article

Personally I think we should take the bull by the horns and deal with the offenders. Discussion is not all about one-upmanship, smart arse retorts and put-downs. Why can't we adopt a new method of dealing with trolls which involves disabling anonymity? Is it against the rules?  Let's call them out!

 

 

 

 

(Taken from the Guardian Newspaper, full article here, https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/media-network-blog/2014/sep/18/psychology-internet-trolls-pewdiepie-youtube-mary-beard. All bold is mine).

 

People often mistake trolling on a football forum for bragging though . 

 

If you can't take a bit of bragging from whichever set of fans happen to be on form at that time then you might aswell not bother with football at all .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lala

Lala

Posted
Posted
Look at it again - Brown hits Swanson's knee which causes him to lose his balance
Corrupt refereeing by Scottish referees again in full evidence today - Peter will be happy though as his boys did the job for him again

923b6491668224c89d6d3fdf2082c3f5.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites
weejoeharper

weejoeharper

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, Forever_blueco said:

People often mistake trolling on a football forum for bragging though . 

 

If you can't take a bit of bragging from whichever set of fans happen to be on form at that time then you might aswell not bother with football at all .

I think I get bragging and the rights that go with it. Done it myself. What I'm talking about is 'trolling'. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
foransbeard

foransbeard

Posted
Posted

Saying a member of a football forum has a disabled son because of interbreeding is the actions of a scumbag.

Im positive that you're as big and tough and hard as you're trying to appear and I've no doubt you would say that I'm a stupid cunt to my face should we ever meet. Bravo.



41fd8bdeaa8de5a4ecec8b1802dbd1ac.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...