Thread: The Hot Topic: Anal Retentive Behavior vs AB Mixture and Its Manifestation on the Internet

This thread is intended to discover why so many people attack others on the net who would otherwise be discussing some idea or current event or a basic subject, maybe to gather opinions or to gather some input about a possible new device. Some simply cannot offer a constructive bit of positive discussion, but seem to feel they must deposit into a discussion some negativity, meaning trolling. It is the equivalent of scribbling a moustache on the person's artwork.

Troll (Internet) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)


The freudian concept of "Anal Retentive" develpomental stage, has since been redesignated as A or B personality type. I'm a physicist, not a psychologist, but I dabble in psychology, so my opinion may be insignificant, still I think this point is valid. The inexact science of behavior needs to revisit the Anal Retentive philosophy because some people never seem to evolve emotionally behind the 2 or 3 year old who is discovering why he or she has their fecal matter incased in a diaper and how other people, usually their parents, react to it. Both A and B types seem to stem from this phase of development, but the A type seems to be obsessive about making certain anything they disagree with is disposed of and that their own perfect manifestations are neatly arranged, whether by their own hand, in fastidiousness, or by someone else's, the A type being the bully, or OCB/OCPD. B types tend to exasperate the A because they don't care about tidiness. A types tend to exasperate the B types by demanding they conform to their concept of organization. On the net the clash between these types interferes with the exchange of ideas. In my opinion, the concept of the Anal Retentive stage of development is a personality trait many people never grow out of. It becomes a behavior type (ARB) and deserves consideration as


A type ARB

vs

B type ARB.

AB mix is considered the best "middle of the road" classification, still how can we ever be completely free of the events or circumstances that formed our personalities while we were being toilet trained. The popular "Transactional Analysis" may help people recondition their routines to work around their personality type flaws, still does it truly destroy the foundation of toilet training instilled behavior?

Gosh!!! Time to send in the clowns already

When one is thinking about ARB it usually references what is commonly defined as "emotional constipation." Essentially what this thread hopes to explore is the connection between trolling and personality types that seem to have some image of a parent spanking them for soiling a diaper and planting them on the toilet with consequences if they move off the commode prior to defecating. Most modern child rearing manuals discourage spanking at all let alone disciplining a kid less than 3 who hasn't caught onto the idea of a toilet.

The question that comes into mind in this has to do with the normal growth of brain structure. Can a severe dose of mean spirited toilet training alter the symmetry of the hippocampus, hypothalamus and deeper yet, the tuber cinereum where vision is pre-processed? This is likely not the average of improper toilet training, but an extreme.

What comes to mind is the borderline personality case depicted in Stephen King's "The Langoliers" movie. Transactional Analysis, such as is used by Phil McGraw, would want the guy to do some theraputic role playing to get rid of those nasty memories of his father demandng from within his own likely OCPD mentality. The guy is driven to delusional behavior and effectively paranoid megalomania. The product of a child beaten into an unnatural personality and mentality. It would seem that mild psychosis would be innevitable unless the person was blessed with an equally strong enough will to defy the beating parent.

The ultimate query in all this is "What is the mentality and personality trait that so aggressively manifests itself as trolling?" Is there any hope for the types who seem so eager to commit mental battery against an otherwise peaceful member of a forum? Is it because that is the only way the troll can interact with others? To demand a certain personality or mindset solution from others?

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why was Albert Einstein considered crazy? | ChaCha

How would Albert Einstein have reacted to some of the types o the net if it were available in 1905? How would he have reacted if he were born in 1950 or 1960 and surfed the net today? Would he socialize in these forums or would he just use the source of current data and stay away from the mad mad world of humanity?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Or maybe they didn't find what they expected from the "hot" and "anal" in the title!

Sorry, that is the most intelligent comment I can make - I have no idea what much of the first post means...

Why was Albert Einstein considered crazy?

Would a better question be: "Was Einstein considered crazy?"

Was he?

Originally Posted by Strange

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Or maybe they didn't find what they expected from the "hot" and "anal" in the title!

Sorry, that is the most intelligent comment I can make - I have no idea what much of the first post means...

Why was Albert Einstein considered crazy?

Would a better question be: "Was Einstein considered crazy?"

Was he?

I'm taken aback that you can't fathom the launch post.


Many considered Einstein crazy. My point is how would he have reacted to the net? Imagine he was the one who started this therad. Imagine why...

Well, apart from anything else, it is full of acronyms that mean nothing to me, A, B, OCPD, ARB, ... And apart from that, I have no way of knowing if it is profound or meaningless.

But isn't Freud pretty much pseudo-science?

Many considered Einstein crazy.

Any references/citations for that? It is not an opinion I have come across. Unlike, say, Cantor.

But isn't Freud pretty much pseudo-science?

More like one of the founding fathers of phsycoanalysis which directly contributes to phsycology as a whole. (Actually I never paid much attention in those history classes. The professor always had his monotone sounding voice...and... Zzzzz...)

Originally Posted by Strange

Well, apart from anything else, it is full of acronyms that mean nothing to me, A, B, OCPD, ARB, ... And apart from that, I have no way of knowing if it is profound or meaningless.

But isn't Freud pretty much pseudo-science?

Many considered Einstein crazy.

Any references/citations for that? It is not an opinion I have come across. Unlike, say, Cantor.

There's a link to the opinion about Einstein. I hope you don't think I'm of that opinion. I believe he was as many others think, a genius.

A type pesonality: Very organized, exacting, timely, prudent, etc.
B type: Pretty much a carefree slob.

OCD : Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
A person with OCD will need to compulsively carry out some ritual such as hand washing, or organization

OCPD: Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder

A person with OCPD demands others do things per their ritual


ARB (tentative and Freudean): Anal Retentive Behavior

A person improperly and severely toilet trained, perhaps by an OCPD type. The original conception was that the person was traumatized by the parent(s) during toilet training resulting in an A type personality compounded with OCPD behavior. A control freak. This is comparable to an internet troll. Where brain chemistry is involved, this person likely has a desperate need for dopamine, contrasted to a muted, ARB type that could become an acetylcholine junkie and possibly an extreme introvert.

That's my understanding. The ARB is considered too much a Freudean concept to be omdern, still I question whether it needs to be revisited. The others may need some better definition by possible members more educated than I am in these areas.

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

There's a link to the opinion about Einstein.

So one random person asking a question on the Internet is equivalent to "many considered Einstein crazy"?

A type pesonality: Very organized, exacting, timely, prudent, etc.
B type: Pretty much a carefree slob.

Any data on numbers? I assume that accounts for some small percentage of the population. What about the rest?

Originally Posted by Strange

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

There's a link to the opinion about Einstein.

So one random person asking a question on the Internet is equivalent to "many considered Einstein crazy"?

A type pesonality: Very organized, exacting, timely, prudent, etc.
B type: Pretty much a carefree slob.

Any data on numbers? I assume that accounts for some small percentage of the population. What about the rest?

As for Einstein, just ask someone on the street. I'm sure it's different today than it was in 1920 or 1930.

As for the personality types, any modern textbook on psychology will tell you it isn't quantified as a description. As for statistics, I'd have to do a search. That may turtn up some numbers, still the entire human race has not been subjected to testing.

I really think you may be missing the idea of the discussion somewhat. Where Einstein is concerned, it's my opinion that, assuming he was born into a world where relativity had already been discovered, yet not proven, he might set out to do that, or perhaps he might set out to take what is known about gravity and come up with an idea about that or perhaps some invention. I think if he encountered too many trolls, he'd withdraw and spend most time away from discussion groups. After all they are not that necessary. One can refrain from socialization ad still accomplish quite a bit to evolve their theory or experiment or invention.

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

As for Einstein, just ask someone on the street. I'm sure it's different today than it was in 1920 or 1930.

Do you think the "man on the street" would say he was crazy? I still don't know why; I have never heard anyone say he was crazy. Slightly eccentric maybe, but I have worked with odder people. And how could we compare that to what people in the '20s or '30s might have thought?

That may turtn up some numbers, still the entire human race has not been subjected to testing.

That is a rather bizarre thing to say. We can very accurate estimates of the distribution of characteristics, including personality types, without measuring even a majority of people. We certainly don't need to test everyone. It just seems to me that the two extremes you describe can barely account for 10% of the population.

I really think you may be missing the idea of the discussion somewhat. Where Einstein is concerned, it's my opinion that, assuming he was born into a world where relativity had already been discovered, yet not proven, he might set out to do that, or perhaps he might set out to take what is known about gravity and come up with an idea about that or perhaps some invention. I think if he encountered too many trolls, he'd withdraw and spend most time away from discussion groups. After all they are not that necessary. One can refrain from socialization ad still accomplish quite a bit to evolve their theory or experiment or invention.

He seems to have had a good idea of his strengths (and limitations). He enjoyed explaining his work and appears to have been a good teacher:

According to his biographer Philipp Frank he was a friendly teacher and unlike many professors lacked any kind of academic vanity. Unlike many professors, he did not seek a reflection of his own personality and ideas in his students. He also seemed aware of taking into account different students with different backgrounds in choosing how he presented his work

(From Classrooms on the Danube: An exploration of the quality of classroom life. - Happy Birthday Albert Einstein, a son of the Danube and a teacher with a feel for process)

So, if pressed, I guess he would have liked the Internet as a place to reach out to people and communicate his ideas. Like many pragmatic people, he probably would have just ignored trolls or pseudo-scientists after finding out that they were not interested in learning or evidence. Or, as he was famous for his sense of humour, maybe he would have just made fun of them (perhaps so that they didn't even realise).

But we can't really ever know.

Originally Posted by Strange

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

As for Einstein, just ask someone on the street. I'm sure it's different today than it was in 1920 or 1930.

Do you think the "man on the street" would say he was crazy? I still don't know why; I have never heard anyone say he was crazy. Slightly eccentric maybe, but I have worked with odder people. And how could we compare that to what people in the '20s or '30s might have thought?

That may turtn up some numbers, still the entire human race has not been subjected to testing.

That is a rather bizarre thing to say. We can very accurate estimates of the distribution of characteristics, including personality types, without measuring even a majority of people. We certainly don't need to test everyone. It just seems to me that the two extremes you describe can barely account for 10% of the population.

I really think you may be missing the idea of the discussion somewhat. Where Einstein is concerned, it's my opinion that, assuming he was born into a world where relativity had already been discovered, yet not proven, he might set out to do that, or perhaps he might set out to take what is known about gravity and come up with an idea about that or perhaps some invention. I think if he encountered too many trolls, he'd withdraw and spend most time away from discussion groups. After all they are not that necessary. One can refrain from socialization ad still accomplish quite a bit to evolve their theory or experiment or invention.

He seems to have had a good idea of his strengths (and limitations). He enjoyed explaining his work and appears to have been a good teacher:

According to his biographer Philipp Frank he was a friendly teacher and unlike many professors lacked any kind of academic vanity. Unlike many professors, he did not seek a reflection of his own personality and ideas in his students. He also seemed aware of taking into account different students with different backgrounds in choosing how he presented his work

(From Classrooms on the Danube: An exploration of the quality of classroom life. - Happy Birthday Albert Einstein, a son of the Danube and a teacher with a feel for process)

So, if pressed, I guess he would have liked the Internet as a place to reach out to people and communicate his ideas. Like many pragmatic people, he probably would have just ignored trolls or pseudo-scientists after finding out that they were not interested in learning or evidence. Or, as he was famous for his sense of humour, maybe he would have just made fun of them (perhaps so that they didn't even realise).

But we can't really ever know.

Einstein's Cosmos by Michio Kaku :: Reader Store

Kaku describes Einstein at one point as "sitting in an easy chair with a child in one arm, a book in the other, a cigar in his mouth and a pot bellied stove filling the room with smoke." Let's say he likely qualified as a mostly type B personality. His earlier study habits were a bit rebellious to say the least.

I imagine you've never heard the song by Kansas "Portrait?" It is about Einstein and some of the words are "No one was sure he was sane."

Yes, I agree, "eccentric" is likely fitting.

There are quite a few trolls out there who target eccentric. Eccentric is often difficult to follow. My experiences in making fun of trolls is it leads to the troll being coddled by a moderator, perhaps the troll's bed partner, while the one poking fun gets banned. Einstein would probably endure just so much and get on with his research.

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

I imagine you've never heard the song by Kansas "Portrait?" It is about Einstein and some of the words are "No one was sure he was sane."

So we have one anonymous question on teh Interwebz and a pop song. Good job this is not a science forum...

Originally Posted by Strange

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

I imagine you've never heard the song by Kansas "Portrait?" It is about Einstein and some of the words are "No one was sure he was sane."

So we have one anonymous question on teh Interwebz and a pop song. Good job this is not a science forum...

Define insane

Post #4 ...

Strange,

We are arguing something that either of us could research and likely find quite a few opinions by non-scientists and scientists. If you have time for that, KYO.

The point is not whether he was insane or how many thought he was or wasn't, it is to discuss the personality of internet trolls. If we look at that original wiki article, we can take what we have already and discuss why these people feel so obligated to target a particular or a random type and disrupt an otherwise meaningful thread. Einstein is so often overused as an example. I'm guilty of that myself, largely because I empathize with him and tend to think he'd have thrown his mouse at the screen a few times.

have you ever encountered an internet troll?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

We are arguing something that either of us could research and likely find quite a few opinions by non-scientists and scientists.

OK. But you brought it up and I couldn't find anything to support it. So it goes.

have you ever encountered an internet troll?

Not many. I tend to ignore (and forget about) them.

Some people are convinced that the people who post ridiculous pseudo-science ideas on forums like this are just trolling; their complete denial of evidence, their unwillingness to learn, inability to provide a rational explanation, repeating the same arguments repeatedly, etc. It is hard to believe that anyone can sincerely think that way. So one conclusion is they are just doing it to wind people up and/or confuse people. I'm not sure. Having visited YouTube, the depths of human stupidity no longer surprise me.

Originally Posted by Strange

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

We are arguing something that either of us could research and likely find quite a few opinions by non-scientists and scientists.

OK. But you brought it up and I couldn't find anything to support it. So it goes.

have you ever encountered an internet troll?

Not many. I tend to ignore (and forget about) them.

Some people are convinced that the people who post ridiculous pseudo-science ideas on forums like this are just trolling; their complete denial of evidence, their unwillingness to learn, inability to provide a rational explanation, repeating the same arguments repeatedly, etc. It is hard to believe that anyone can sincerely think that way. So one conclusion is they are just doing it to wind people up and/or confuse people. I'm not sure. Having visited YouTube, the depths of human stupidity no longer surprise me.

John Baez has an interesting list of "signs" of a pseudo-scientific. Although I agree with many opinions on the list, in fact most of them, one can question if he failed himself by including self-incriminating opinions in that list. Sometimes it is easy to spot pseudo-science, but other times one needs to give the proposer the benefit of the doubt, usually till the math comes in.

Psychology has for so many years been dubbed the "inexact science." Now we have active NMRI so we can determine responses more exactly. Einstein is no longer with us, unfortunately. Trolls unfortunately are. Their are likely many people out there in this big electronic net who are much like Einstein and, like him, they challenge mainstream scientific findings and what is accepted. Without that there's little need to learn anymore because it is already known. We know better. A poor challenger is often booed as a pseudo-scientist, crackpot, quack, whatever by anyone who can't follow their meaning, regardless of their mathematic ability, by someone who should really be trying to learn what is being purveyed first.

I'm glad you have had better luck with all that. An eccentric scientist may not be so lucky.

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Fascinating.

You'd be surprized to know how many people don't know what that means.

No I wouldn't. I live among people...

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

No I wouldn't. I live among people...

Well then it all makes sense. Proliferous discussions about trolls that eat Einsteins and what makes them so sometimes end up like perpetual Jeopardy quests.

Originally Posted by Lander_Greys

But isn't Freud pretty much pseudo-science?

More like one of the founding fathers of phsycoanalysis which directly contributes to phsycology as a whole. (Actually I never paid much attention in those history classes. The professor always had his monotone sounding voice...and... Zzzzz...)

But you can at least SPELL "history"- unlike "psychology" and "psychoanalysis". In other news, you mama dresses you funny.

So, Hec, does any of this make me a "troll"? Probably anal, depending on who you ask, too...

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Fascinating.

You'd be surprized to know how many people don't know what that means.

I'm with Wayne on this one. Many's the time I have read a thread, shook my head, and wandered on, unable or unwilling to contribute. This does not necessarily imply tacit approval. There are others to which I have vigorously contributed, to my detriment, why?

Because it amuses me to do so. I have even played devil's advocate on some issues, merely for the love of being contrary.

Human beings are so irrational it is a miracle that science exists at all to me. Does that make me OCD, ADA, DOA or DDAVP?

Originally Posted by Arthur Angler

Originally Posted by Lander_Greys

But isn't Freud pretty much pseudo-science?

More like one of the founding fathers of phsycoanalysis which directly contributes to phsycology as a whole. (Actually I never paid much attention in those history classes. The professor always had his monotone sounding voice...and... Zzzzz...)

But you can at least SPELL "history"- unlike "psychology" and "psychoanalysis". In other news, you mama dresses you funny.

So, Hec, does any of this make me a "troll"? Probably anal, depending on who you ask, too...

That's thew question about the discussion.

I don't think it targeted any individual, save for looking at how Einstein might have acted or reacted to the net... pardon the pun. It is all of trying to guess things about a dead man.

Albert Einstein had a lot of B Type personality in him, but likely was an AB mix like most people.

FWIW ... I did n't set out to make the title sound so punny. It was a retro-discovery...

Originally Posted by Arthur Angler

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Fascinating.

You'd be surprized to know how many people don't know what that means.

I'm with Wayne on this one. Many's the time I have read a thread, shook my head, and wandered on, unable or unwilling to contribute. This does not necessarily imply tacit approval. There are others to which I have vigorously contributed, to my detriment, why?

Because it amuses me to do so. I have even played devil's advocate on some issues, merely for the love of being contrary.

Human beings are so irrational it is a miracle that science exists at all to me. Does that make me OCD, ADA, DOA or DDAVP?

Sometimes it IS a wonder science exists. I'm not a psychologist, so I can't answer that question. This thread asks that question, though. What personality is a troll? OCPD? Type A? Is a troll a throwback to toilet training trauma?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by Arthur Angler

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Fascinating.

You'd be surprized to know how many people don't know what that means.

I'm with Wayne on this one. Many's the time I have read a thread, shook my head, and wandered on, unable or unwilling to contribute. This does not necessarily imply tacit approval. There are others to which I have vigorously contributed, to my detriment, why?

Because it amuses me to do so. I have even played devil's advocate on some issues, merely for the love of being contrary.

Human beings are so irrational it is a miracle that science exists at all to me. Does that make me OCD, ADA, DOA or DDAVP?

Sometimes it IS a wonder science exists. I'm not a psychologist, so I can't answer that question. This thread asks that question, though. What personality is a troll? OCPD? Type A? Is a troll a throwback to toilet training trauma?

I'd say a Troll is High on Extraversion, Low on Agreeableness, I'm not so sure Neuroticism really makes a difference in the case of trolls. As for Conscientiousness, I'd say that could go either way. I'm assuming trolls would be low on Openness as well. Then again, that's merely just an opinion of the 'personality' a troll dons when trolling. In my honest opinion? Trolling is a part of an alter-ego that is employed to reach some goal.

I don't think Person X who trolls on Monday will take on the same dynamics when Person X trolls on Tuesday. I think the Troll dynamic is entirely spontaneous and forms in the moment of the decision to troll. So a person who trolls, probably isn't a troll all the time. I don't think you can link the Anal Rententitive phase to people who troll, strictly because as I understand - the troll isn't real. The troll is a character people sometimes play for the sake of entertaining themselves.

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by Arthur Angler

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Fascinating.

You'd be surprized to know how many people don't know what that means.

I'm with Wayne on this one. Many's the time I have read a thread, shook my head, and wandered on, unable or unwilling to contribute. This does not necessarily imply tacit approval. There are others to which I have vigorously contributed, to my detriment, why?

Because it amuses me to do so. I have even played devil's advocate on some issues, merely for the love of being contrary.

Human beings are so irrational it is a miracle that science exists at all to me. Does that make me OCD, ADA, DOA or DDAVP?

Sometimes it IS a wonder science exists. I'm not a psychologist, so I can't answer that question. This thread asks that question, though. What personality is a troll? OCPD? Type A? Is a troll a throwback to toilet training trauma?

I'd say a Troll is High on Extraversion, Low on Agreeableness, I'm not so sure Neuroticism really makes a difference in the case of trolls. As for Conscientiousness, I'd say that could go either way. I'm assuming trolls would be low on Openness as well. Then again, that's merely just an opinion of the 'personality' a troll dons when trolling. In my honest opinion? Trolling is a part of an alter-ego that is employed to reach some goal.

I don't think Person X who trolls on Monday will take on the same dynamics when Person X trolls on Tuesday. I think the Troll dynamic is entirely spontaneous and forms in the moment of the decision to troll. So a person who trolls, probably isn't a troll all the time. I don't think you can link the Anal Rententitive phase to people who troll, strictly because as I understand - the troll isn't real. The troll is a character people sometimes play for the sake of entertaining themselves.

That's a thought. Then the question that spawns from your answer is what type of person would have troll magnet attributes? Just anyone or would certin types atract trolling types?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by Arthur Angler

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by MeteorWayne

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

So far, this is my take. This thread has been viewed over 100 times. By that token all who viewed this are tacitly acknowledging it to be the truth.

Why would you think that. Some of us read threads for amusement or to see the convoluted paths a human mind can take.

Fascinating.

You'd be surprized to know how many people don't know what that means.

I'm with Wayne on this one. Many's the time I have read a thread, shook my head, and wandered on, unable or unwilling to contribute. This does not necessarily imply tacit approval. There are others to which I have vigorously contributed, to my detriment, why?

Because it amuses me to do so. I have even played devil's advocate on some issues, merely for the love of being contrary.

Human beings are so irrational it is a miracle that science exists at all to me. Does that make me OCD, ADA, DOA or DDAVP?

Sometimes it IS a wonder science exists. I'm not a psychologist, so I can't answer that question. This thread asks that question, though. What personality is a troll? OCPD? Type A? Is a troll a throwback to toilet training trauma?

I'd say a Troll is High on Extraversion, Low on Agreeableness, I'm not so sure Neuroticism really makes a difference in the case of trolls. As for Conscientiousness, I'd say that could go either way. I'm assuming trolls would be low on Openness as well. Then again, that's merely just an opinion of the 'personality' a troll dons when trolling. In my honest opinion? Trolling is a part of an alter-ego that is employed to reach some goal.

I don't think Person X who trolls on Monday will take on the same dynamics when Person X trolls on Tuesday. I think the Troll dynamic is entirely spontaneous and forms in the moment of the decision to troll. So a person who trolls, probably isn't a troll all the time. I don't think you can link the Anal Rententitive phase to people who troll, strictly because as I understand - the troll isn't real. The troll is a character people sometimes play for the sake of entertaining themselves.

That's a thought. Then the question that spawns from your answer is what type of person would have troll magnet attributes? Just anyone or would certin types atract trolling types?

I think that trolls are influenced by any statement that appears overt, or too generalized. Possibly anything so much as a username triggers someone to go into 'troll mode'. I think the decision to troll is based on the conceptual image of the person that is being trolled.

Then a troll is something of a stalker in your opinion?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Then a troll is something of a stalker in your opinion?

Not at all, what I mean is a little more like this: Let's just say for this example I am somebody who trolls. I'm going around youtube and watching videos, when all of a sudden I see a comment, made by 'harriepottah4evr' that says, 'LOL THATS FUNNIE'.

Now, the username, the comment, and the comment being in all capitals, tells me something about the person who posted it. I may find my conceptual image of the poster to be disagreeable. My conceptual image, of course, will not be very accurate. Those three factors don't tell me much about the person in question, but that doesn't make a difference. I've already made an opinion about what kind of person this is, and I don't like them. This pushes my 'troll button', so now I'm going to harass them.

So it's not stalking its more like: I'm doing my own thing, I see something that I don't like, I have anonymity - and so now I'm going to harass, because I can. There isn't any repercussions, and I'll probably be entertained by annoying somebody I already 'know' I don't like.

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Then a troll is something of a stalker in your opinion?

Not at all, what I mean is a little more like this: Let's just say for this example I am somebody who trolls. I'm going around youtube and watching videos, when all of a sudden I see a comment, made by 'harriepottah4evr' that says, 'LOL THATS FUNNIE'.

Now, the username, the comment, and the comment being in all capitals, tells me something about the person who posted it. I may find my conceptual image of the poster to be disagreeable. My conceptual image, of course, will not be very accurate. Those three factors don't tell me much about the person in question, but that doesn't make a difference. I've already made an opinion about what kind of person this is, and I don't like them. This pushes my 'troll button', so now I'm going to harass them.

So it's not stalking its more like: I'm doing my own thing, I see something that I don't like, I have anonymity - and so now I'm going to harass, because I can. There isn't any repercussions, and I'll probably be entertained by annoying somebody I already 'know' I don't like.

Then trolling is a latent psychosis or just a mean steak?

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Then a troll is something of a stalker in your opinion?

Not at all, what I mean is a little more like this: Let's just say for this example I am somebody who trolls. I'm going around youtube and watching videos, when all of a sudden I see a comment, made by 'harriepottah4evr' that says, 'LOL THATS FUNNIE'.

Now, the username, the comment, and the comment being in all capitals, tells me something about the person who posted it. I may find my conceptual image of the poster to be disagreeable. My conceptual image, of course, will not be very accurate. Those three factors don't tell me much about the person in question, but that doesn't make a difference. I've already made an opinion about what kind of person this is, and I don't like them. This pushes my 'troll button', so now I'm going to harass them.

So it's not stalking its more like: I'm doing my own thing, I see something that I don't like, I have anonymity - and so now I'm going to harass, because I can. There isn't any repercussions, and I'll probably be entertained by annoying somebody I already 'know' I don't like.

Then trolling is a latent psychosis or just a mean steak?

Well, there's a little troll in all of us.

Edit: Ever resort to making a sarcastic remark during a heated debate? I'm not perfect, I'm guilty of that.. And I KNOW the only purpose it served was to satisfy my own displeasure - however petty it could've been.

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Originally Posted by stander-j

Originally Posted by HectorDecimal

Then a troll is something of a stalker in your opinion?

Not at all, what I mean is a little more like this: Let's just say for this example I am somebody who trolls. I'm going around youtube and watching videos, when all of a sudden I see a comment, made by 'harriepottah4evr' that says, 'LOL THATS FUNNIE'.

Now, the username, the comment, and the comment being in all capitals, tells me something about the person who posted it. I may find my conceptual image of the poster to be disagreeable. My conceptual image, of course, will not be very accurate. Those three factors don't tell me much about the person in question, but that doesn't make a difference. I've already made an opinion about what kind of person this is, and I don't like them. This pushes my 'troll button', so now I'm going to harass them.

So it's not stalking its more like: I'm doing my own thing, I see something that I don't like, I have anonymity - and so now I'm going to harass, because I can. There isn't any repercussions, and I'll probably be entertained by annoying somebody I already 'know' I don't like.

Then trolling is a latent psychosis or just a mean steak?

Well, there's a little troll in all of us.

Edit: Ever resort to making a sarcastic remark during a heated debate? I'm not perfect, I'm guilty of that.. And I KNOW the only purpose it served was to satisfy my own displeasure - however petty it could've been.

Then some could be psychotic, in that they just have to react to someone's speech hatefully, where others occasionally give in to the temptation to be mean?