User blog comment:Sannse/Don't Feed the Trolls/@comment-5520498-20120917160815/@comment-8-20120917211410

You have some interesting points here :)

I think there are two parts to this. The first is that not all people who cause problems or are disruptive are trolls. "Don't feed the trolls" is a way to respond to a specific type of disruptor - it doesn't always apply to other types. Someone who is bullying may also be a troll, or they may not. And if they aren't looking for attention in the same way, they may need to be reacted to differently, as you say.

The other part is that "don't feed the trolls" doesn't mean "don't do anything to fix the problem". There are three parts to "revert, block, ignore", and all of them are important. The same is true with a bully - an admin might decide to remove the inappropriate comments, or block the bully, or to give them a firm warning to change their behavior.... all of which clearly show that bullying isn't acceptable, and give support to the person being bullied, and none of which give the sort of feedback and drama a troll is looking for.

But I agree that there is a trap in there being an outcry of "you're doing it wrong, you shouldn't react!!". That can increase the drama rather than reduce it. That's why talking about the problems of dramatic responses before the situation happens can help.

To take one of your scenarios, this is how my version would go:

"Gay people start talking about local anti-gay legislation. Someone makes a homophobic slur. The gay people get angry but carry on talking to each other without replying directly to the person provoking them. One of them asks an admin to look at the conversation.  The admin sees the problem and leaves a message on the troll/bully's talk page to say: 'the language you used on the blog was unacceptable, I have banned you for 3 days.  If you come back after that, please be sure to keep conversations polite to all.'"