Trolling

In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally[3][4] or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[5] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[6] This sense of the word troll and its associated verb trolling are associated with Internet discourse, but have been used more widely. Media attention in recent years has equated trolling with online harassment. For example, mass media has used troll to describe "a person who defaces Internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."[7][8] Contents [hide] 1 Usage 2 Origin and etymology 2.1 In other languages 3 Trolling, identity, and anonymity 4 Psychological characteristics of trolls 5 Concern troll 6 Troll sites 7 Media coverage and controversy 7.1 Australia 7.2 United Kingdom 7.3 United States 8 Examples 9 See also 10 References 11 Further reading 12 External links 12.1 Trolling advocacy and safety 12.2 Background and definitions 12.3 Academic and debate Usage The advice to ignore rather than engage with a troll is sometimes phrased as "Please do not feed the trolls."Application of the term troll is subjective. Some readers may characterize a post as trolling, while others may regard the same post as a legitimate contribution to the discussion, even if controversial. Like any pejorative term, it can be used as an ad hominem attack, suggesting a negative motivation. As noted in an OS News article titled "Why People Troll and How to Stop Them" (January 25, 2012), "The traditional definition of trolling includes intent. That is, trolls purposely disrupt forums. This definition is too narrow. Whether someone intends to disrupt a thread or not, the results are the same if they do."[3][4] Others have addressed the same issue, e.g., Claire Hardaker, in her Ph.D. thesis[4] "Trolling in asynchronous computer-mediated communication: From user discussions to academic definitions",[9] and Dr. Phil.[citation needed] Popular recognition of the existence (and prevalence) of non-deliberate, "accidental trolls", has been documented widely, in sources as diverse as the Urban Dictionary,[10] Nicole Sullivan's keynote speech at the 2012 Fluent Conference, titled "Don't Feed the Trolls"[11] Gizmodo,[12] online opinions on the subject written by Silicon Valley executives[13] and comics.[14] Regardless of the circumstances, controversial posts may attract a particularly strong response from those unfamiliar with the robust dialogue found in some online, rather than physical, communities. Experienced participants in online forums know that the most effective way to discourage a troll is usually to ignore it,[citation needed] because responding tends to encourage trolls to continue disruptive posts – hence the often-seen warning: "Please do not feed the trolls". A popular early article defining and explaining the issue of Internet Trolls included the suggestion, "The only way to deal with trolls is to limit your reaction to reminding others not to respond to trolls."[1] The "trollface" is an image occasionally used to indicate trolling in Internet culture.[15][16][17] Origin and etymologyThere are competing theories of where and when troll was first used in Internet slang, with numerous unattested accounts of BBS and UseNet origins in the early 80s or before. The origin of the English noun troll in the standard sense of ugly dwarf or giant dates to 1610 and comes from the Old Norse word 'troll' meaning giant or demon.[18] The word evokes the trolls of Scandinavian folklore and children's tales, where they are at times beings bent on mischief and wickedness.[19] In modern English usage, trolling may describe the fishing technique of slowly dragging a lure or baited hook from a moving boat[20] whereas trawling describes the generally commercial act of dragging a fishing net. Early non-Internet related slang use of trolling for actions deliberately performed to provoke a reaction can be found in the military—by 1972 the term trolling for MiGs was documented in use by US Navy pilots in Vietnam.[21] The contemporary slang use of the term is alleged to have appeared on the Internet in the late 1980s,[22] but the earliest known attestation is from the OED in 1992.[23] Another claim sets the origin in Usenet in the early 1990s as in the phrase "trolling for newbies", as used in alt.folklore.urban (AFU).[24][25] Commonly, what is meant is a relatively gentle inside joke by veteran users, presenting questions or topics that had been so overdone that only a new user would respond to them earnestly. For example, a veteran of the group might make a post on the common misconception that glass flows over time. Long-time readers would both recognize the poster's name and know that the topic had been discussed a lot, but new subscribers to the group would not realize, and would thus respond. These types of trolls served as a practice to identify group insiders. This definition of trolling, considerably narrower than the modern understanding of the term, was considered a positive contribution.[24][26] One of the most notorious AFU trollers, David Mikkelson,[24] went on to create the urban folklore website Snopes.com. By the late 1990s, alt.folklore.urban had such heavy traffic and participation that trolling of this sort was frowned upon. Others expanded the term to include the practice of playing a seriously misinformed or deluded user, even in newsgroups where one was not a regular; these were often attempts at humor rather than provocation. In such contexts, the noun troll usually referred to an act of trolling — or to the resulting discussion — rather than to the author. In other languagesIn Chinese, trolling is referred to as bái mù (Chinese: 白目; literally "white eye"), which can be straightforwardly explained as "eyes without pupils", in the sense that whilst the pupil of the eye is used for vision, the white section of the eye cannot see, and trolling involves blindly talking nonsense over the internet, having total disregard to sensitivities or being oblivious to the situation at hand, akin to having eyes without pupils. An alternative term is bái làn (Chinese: 白爛; literally "white rot"), which describes a post completely nonsensical and full of folly made to upset others, and derives from a Taiwanese slang term for the male genitalia, where genitalia that is pale white in colour represents that someone is young, and thus foolish. Both terms originate from Taiwan, and are also used in Hong Kong and mainland China. Another term, xiǎo bái (Chinese: 小白; literally "little white") is a derogatory term that refers to both bái mù and bái làn that is used on anonymous posting internet forums. Another common term for a troll used in mainland China is pēn zi (Chinese: 噴子; literally "sprayer, spurter"). In Japanese, tsuri (釣り?) means "fishing" and refers to intentionally misleading posts whose only purpose is to get the readers to react, i.e. get trolled. arashi (荒らし?) means "laying waste" and can also be used to refer to simple spamming. In Icelandic, þurs (a thurs) or tröll (a troll) may refer to trolls, the verbs þursa (to troll) or þursast (to be trolling, to troll about) may be used. In Korean, nak-si (낚시) means "fishing", and is used to refer to Internet trolling attempts, as well as purposefully misleading post titles. A person who recognizes the troll after having responded (or, in case of a post title nak-si, having read the actual post) would often refer to himself as a caught fish.[citation needed] In Portuguese, more commonly in its Brazilian variant, troll (produced [ˈtɾɔw] in most of Brazil as spelling pronunciation) is the usual term to denote internet trolls (examples of common derivate terms are trollismo or trollagem, "trolling", and the verb trollar, "to troll", which entered popular use), but an older expression, used by those which want to avoid anglicisms or slangs, is complexo do pombo enxadrista to denote trolling behavior, and pombos enxadristas (literally, "chessplayer pigeons") or simply pombos are the terms used to name the trolls. The terms are explained by an adage or popular saying: "Arguing with fulano (i.e., John Doe) is the same as playing chess with a pigeon: the pigeon defecates on the table, drop the pieces and simply fly, claiming victory." In Thai, the term "krean" (เกรียน) has been adopted to address Internet trolls. The term literally refers to a closely cropped hairstyle worn by most school boys in Thailand, thus equating Internet trolls to school boys. The term "tob krean" (ตบเกรียน), or "slapping a cropped head", refers to the act of posting intellectual replies to refute and cause the messages of Internet trolls to be perceived as unintelligent.[citation needed] In Sinhala Language this is called ala kiríma (අල කිරීම), which means "Turning it into Potatoes (Sabotage)". Sometimes it is used as ala vagaa kiríma (අල වගා කිරීම) – "Planting Potatoes". People/Profiles who does trolling often are called "Potato Planters" – ala vagákaruvan (අල වගාකරුවන්). This seems to be originated from university slang ala veda (අල වැඩ) which means "Potato business" is used for breaking the laws/codes of the university. Trolling, identity, and anonymity Jimbo Wales at Wikimania 2006 on a conference discussing the identification and elimination of trollsEarly incidents of trolling[27] were considered to be the same as flaming, but this has changed with modern usage by the news media to refer to the creation of any content that targets another person. The Internet dictionary NetLingo suggests there are four grades of trolling: playtime trolling, tactical trolling, strategic trolling, and domination trolling.[28] The relationship between trolling and flaming was observed in open-access forums in California, on a series of modem-linked computers. CommuniTree was begun in 1978 but was closed in 1982 when accessed by high school teenagers, becoming a ground for trashing and abuse.[29] Some psychologists have suggested that flaming would be caused by deindividuation or decreased self-evaluation: the anonymity of online postings would lead to disinhibition amongst individuals[30] Others have suggested that although flaming and trolling is often unpleasant, it may be a form of normative behavior that expresses the social identity of a certain user group [31][32] According to Tom Postmes, a professor of social and organisational psychology at the universities of Exeter, England, and Groningen, The Netherlands, and the author of Individuality and the Group, who has studied online behavior for 20 years, "Trolls aspire to violence, to the level of trouble they can cause in an environment. They want it to kick off. They want to promote antipathetic emotions of disgust and outrage, which morbidly gives them a sense of pleasure."[29] In academic literature, the practice of trolling was first documented by Judith Donath (1999). Donath's paper outlines the ambiguity of identity in a disembodied "virtual community" such as Usenet: In the physical world there is an inherent unity to the self, for the body provides a compelling and convenient definition of identity. The norm is: one body, one identity ... The virtual world is different. It is composed of information rather than matter.[33] Donath provides a concise overview of identity deception games which trade on the confusion between physical and epistemic community: Trolling is a game about identity deception, albeit one that is played without the consent of most of the players. The troll attempts to pass as a legitimate participant, sharing the group's common interests and concerns; the newsgroups members, if they are cognizant of trolls and other identity deceptions, attempt to both distinguish real from trolling postings, and upon judging a poster a troll, make the offending poster leave the group. Their success at the former depends on how well they – and the troll – understand identity cues; their success at the latter depends on whether the troll's enjoyment is sufficiently diminished or outweighed by the costs imposed by the group. Trolls can be costly in several ways. A troll can disrupt the discussion on a newsgroup, disseminate bad advice, and damage the feeling of trust in the newsgroup community. Furthermore, in a group that has become sensitized to trolling – where the rate of deception is high – many honestly naïve questions may be quickly rejected as trollings. This can be quite off-putting to the new user who upon venturing a first posting is immediately bombarded with angry accusations. Even if the accusation is unfounded, being branded a troll is quite damaging to one's online reputation.[33] Susan Herring and colleagues in "Searching for Safety Online: Managing 'Trolling' in a Feminist Forum" point out the difficulty inherent in monitoring trolling and maintaining freedom of speech in online communities: "harassment often arises in spaces known for their freedom, lack of censure, and experimental nature".[34] Free speech may lead to tolerance of trolling behavior, complicating the members' efforts to maintain an open, yet supportive discussion area, especially for sensitive topics such as race, gender, and sexuality.[34] In an effort to reduce uncivil behavior by increasing accountability, many web sites (e.g. Reuters, Facebook, and Gizmodo) now require commenters to register their names and e-mail addresses.[35] Psychological characteristics of trollsTwo studies published in 2013 and 2014 have found that people who are identified as trolls tend to have dark personality traits and show signs of sadism, antisocial behavior, psychopathy, and Machiavellianism. [36] [37] The 2013 study suggested that there are a number of similarities between anti-social and flame trolling activities[36] and the 2014 study suggested that the noxious personality characteristics known as the dark triad of personality should be investigated in the analysis of trolling.[37] Their relevance is suggested by research linking these traits to bullying in both adolescents and adults. The 2014 study found that trolls operate as agents of chaos on the Internet, exploiting hot-button issues to make users appear overly emotional or foolish in some manner. If an unfortunate person falls into their trap, trolling intensifies for further, merciless amusement. This is why novice Internet users are routinely admonished, "Do not feed the trolls!" The 2013 study found that trolls often have a high expectation of what it means to be successful, which is higher than they are able to attain and this results in them resenting others who think they are successful but whom fall below their standards. "Haters gonna hate" sums up this line of thinking. Concern trollA concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user claims to hold. The concern troll posts in Web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[38] An example of this occurred in 2006 when Tad Furtado, a staffer for then-Congressman Charles Bass (R-NH), was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass' opponent, Democrat Paul Hodes, on several liberal New Hampshire blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH". "IndyNH" expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes, because Bass was unbeatable.[39][40] Hodes eventually won the election. Although the term "concern troll" originated in discussions of online behavior, it now sees increasing use to describe similar behaviors that take place offline. For example, James Wolcott of Vanity Fair accused a conservative New York Daily News columnist of "concern troll" behavior in his efforts to downplay the Mark Foley scandal. Wolcott links what he calls concern trolls to what Saul Alinsky calls "Do-Nothings", giving a long quote from Alinsky on the Do-Nothings' method and effects: These Do-Nothings profess a commitment to social change for ideals of justice, equality, and opportunity, and then abstain from and discourage all effective action for change. They are known by their brand, 'I agree with your ends but not your means'.[41] The Hill published an op-ed piece by Markos Moulitsas of the liberal blog Daily Kos titled "Dems: Ignore 'Concern Trolls'". The concern trolls in question were not Internet participants; they were Republicans offering public advice and warnings to the Democrats. The author defines "concern trolling" as "offering a poisoned apple in the form of advice to political opponents that, if taken, would harm the recipient".[42] Troll sitesWhile many webmasters and forum administrators consider trolls a scourge on their sites, some websites welcome them. For example, a New York Times article discussed troll activity at 4chan and at Encyclopedia Dramatica, which it described as "an online compendium of troll humor and troll lore".[22] This site and others are often used as a base to troll against sites that their members can not normally post on. These trolls feed off the reactions of their victims because "their agenda is to take delight in causing trouble".[43] Media coverage and controversyMainstream media outlets have focused their attention on the willingness of how some Internet users to go to extreme lengths to participate in organized psychological harassment. AustraliaIn February 2010, the Australian government became involved after users defaced the Facebook tribute pages of murdered children Trinity Bates and Elliott Fletcher. Australian communications minister Stephen Conroy decried the attacks, committed mainly by 4chan users, as evidence of the need for greater Internet regulation, stating, "This argument that the Internet is some mystical creation that no laws should apply to, that is a recipe for anarchy and the wild west."[44] Facebook responded by strongly urging administrators to be aware of ways to ban users and remove inappropriate content from Facebook pages.[45] In 2012, the Daily Telegraph started a campaign to take action against "Twitter trolls", who abuse and threaten users. Several high-profile Australians including Charlotte Dawson, Robbie Farah, Laura Dundovic, and Ray Hadley have been victims of this phenomenon.[46][47][48] United KingdomIn the United Kingdom, contributions made to the Internet are covered by the Communications Act 2003. Sending messages which are "grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character" is an offense whether they are received by the intended recipient or not.[49] Several people have been imprisoned in the UK for trolling.[50] Sean Duffy, who mocked the testimonial page of a dead teenager, was sentenced to eighteen weeks in prison and banned from using social networking sites for five years.[51] Jamie Counsel was sentenced to four years for trying to incite riots.[52] Trolls of the testimonial page of Georgia Varley faced no prosecution due to misunderstandings of the legal system in the wake of the term trolling being popularized.[53] In October 2012, a twenty-year-old man was jailed for twelve weeks for posting offensive jokes to a support group for friends and family of April Jones.[54] Later that month, The Register said there was a viewpoint that "the Crown Prosecution Service needs to reel in cops who are busily collaring trolls more or less at random ... usually responding to public pressure from media or social media".[55] United StatesOn March 31, 2010, the Today Show ran a segment detailing the deaths of three separate adolescent girls and trolls' subsequent reactions to their deaths. Shortly after the suicide of high school student Alexis Pilkington, anonymous posters began performing organized psychological harassment across various message boards, referring to Pilkington as a "suicidal slut", and posting graphic images on her Facebook memorial page. The segment also included an exposé of a 2006 accident, in which an eighteen-year old fatally crashed her father's car into a highway pylon; trolls emailed her grieving family the leaked pictures of her mutilated corpse.[8] In 2012, the subject of trolling was featured on the HBO series The Newsroom. ExamplesAs reported on April 8, 1999, investors became victims of trolling via an online financial discussion regarding PairGain, a telephone equipment company based in California. Trolls operating in the stock's Yahoo Finance chat room posted a fabricated Bloomberg News article stating that an Israeli telecom company could potentially acquire PairGain. As a result, PairGain's stock jumped by 31%. However, the stock promptly crashed after the reports were identified as false.[56] So-called Gold Membership trolling originated in 2007 on 4chan boards, users posting fake images claiming to offer upgraded 4chan account privileges; without a "Gold" account, one could not view certain content. This turned out to be a hoax designed to fool board members, especially newcomers. It was copied and became an Internet meme. In some cases, this type of troll has been used as a scam, most notably on Facebook, where fake Facebook Gold Account upgrade ads have proliferated in order to link users to dubious websites and other content.[57] The case of Zeran v. America Online, Inc. resulted primarily from trolling. Six days after the Oklahoma City bombing, anonymous users posted advertisements for shirts celebrating the bombing on AOL message boards, claiming that the shirts could be obtained by contacting Mr. Kenneth Zeran. The posts listed Zeran's address and home phone number. Zeran was subsequently harassed.[56] Anti-Scientology protests by Anonymous, commonly known as Project Chanology, are sometimes labeled as "trolling" by media such as Wired,[58] and the participants sometimes explicitly self-identify as "trolls". See also Internet portal Anti-social behaviour Cyber-bullying Flame war Griefer Heckler Hit-and-run posting Patent troll Poe's Law Social gadfly Sockpuppet (Internet) Vandal (Wikipedia) Wikipedia:Trolling References1.^ Jump up to: a b "Internet Trolls". Internet Archive. July 2001. Retrieved 2013-06-14. 2.Jump up ^ "Definition of troll". Collins English Dictionary. Retrieved 2012-09-17. 3.^ Jump up to: a b Howard Fosdick (Wed 25th Jan 2012 06:58 UTC). "Why People Troll and How to Stop Them". OS News. Check date values in: |date= (help) 4.^ Jump up to: a b c Tastam90, Message # 369489 (Jun 9, 2013). "Terminology: Trolling in CNet?!?". CollegeNET. 5.Jump up ^ "Definition of: trolling". PCMAG.COM (Ziff Davis Publishing Holdings Inc). 2009. Retrieved 2009-03-24. 6.Jump up ^ Indiana University: University Information Technology Services (2008-05-05). "What is a troll?". Indiana University Knowledge Base. The Trustees of Indiana University. Retrieved 2009-03-24. 7.Jump up ^ "Police charge alleged creator of Facebook hate page aimed at murder victim". The Courier Mail (Australia). 2010-07-22. Retrieved 2010-07-27. 8.^ Jump up to: a b "Trolling: The Today Show Explores the Dark Side of the Internet", March 31, 2010. Retrieved on April 4, 2010. 9.Jump up ^ Hardaker, C. (2010). "Trolling in asynchronous computer-mediated communication: From user discussions to academic definitions". Journal of Politeness Research. Language, Behaviour, Culture 6 (2). doi:10.1515/JPLR.2010.011. edit 10.Jump up ^ "Accidental Troll". Urban Dictionary. 11.Jump up ^ "DE-TROLLING THE WEB: DON'T POST IN ANGER". 2012-06-04. 12.Jump up ^ Mat Honan (Jan 6, 2012). "Why We Troll". 13.Jump up ^ =Mike Elgan (Jan 6, 2012). "What is a troll?". Google+. 14.Jump up ^ "Accidental troll mom rage". RageComics. Retrieved 9 July 2013. 15.Jump up ^ Trollface hack strikes PlayStation 3? PSU community member reports XMB weirdness. 16.Jump up ^ "Pasta" y "MasterDog" ya son parte de la jerga universitaria. 17.Jump up ^ "Forever Alone" y "Ay sí, ay sí", entre los más populares. 18.Jump up ^ Harper, Douglas. "troll". Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved 2013-06-14. 19.Jump up ^ "Trolls. Who are they?". unknown. Retrieved July 3, 2013. 20.Jump up ^ "troll". Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2010. Retrieved 7 January 2010. 21.Jump up ^ John Saar (February 4, 1972). "Carrier War". Life. 22.^ Jump up to: a b Schwartz, Mattathias (2008-08-03). "The Trolls Among Us". The New York Times. pp. MM24. Retrieved 2009-03-24. 23.Jump up ^ "troll, n.1". Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford University Press). 2006. Retrieved 1 March 2010. 24.^ Jump up to: a b c Tepper, Michele (1997). "Usenet Communities and the Cultural Politics of Information". In Porter, David. Internet culture. New York, New York, United States: Routledge Inc. p. 48. ISBN 978-0-415-91683-7. Retrieved 2009-03-24. "... the two most notorious trollers in AFU, Ted Frank and Snopes, are also two of the most consistent posters of serious research." 25.Jump up ^ Miller, Mark S. (1990-02-08). "FOADTAD". alt.flame. Web link. "Just go die in your sleep you mindless flatulent troll.". Retrieved 2009-06-02. 26.Jump up ^ Zotti, Ed; et al. (2000-04-14). "What is a troll?". The Straight Dope. Retrieved 2009-03-24. "To be fair, not all trolls are slimeballs. On some message boards, veteran posters with a mischievous bent occasionally go 'newbie trolling.'" Cite uses deprecated parameters (help) 27.Jump up ^ Stevan Harnad (1987/2011) "Sky-Writing, Or, When Man First Met Troll" The Atlantic 28.Jump up ^ "Troll (aka Trolling)". Netlingo.com. 1994-2011. Retrieved 2011-11-21. "In general, to "troll" means to allure, to fish, to entice or to bait. Internet trolls are people who fish for other people's confidence and, once found, exploit it. Trolls vary in nature." Check date values in: |date= (help) 29.^ Jump up to: a b Adams, Tim (24 July 2011). "How the internet created an age of rage". London: The Guardian (The Observer). 30.Jump up ^ S. Kiesler, J. Siegel and T.W. McGuire (1984). "Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication". American Psychologist 39 (10): 1123–1134. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.39.10.1123. 31.Jump up ^ M. Lea, T. O'Shea, P. Fung and R. Spears (1992). "'Flaming' in Computer-Mediated Communication: observation, explanations, implications". Contexts of Computer-Mediated Communication: 89–112. 32.Jump up ^ Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). "Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication". Communication Research (25): 689–715. 33.^ Jump up to: a b Donath, Judith S. (1999). "Identity and deception in the virtual community". In Smith, Marc A.; Kollock, Peter. Communities in Cyberspace (illustrated, reprint ed.). Routledge. pp. 29–59. ISBN 978-0-415-19140-1. Retrieved 2009-03-24. 34.^ Jump up to: a b Herring, Susan; Job-Sluder, Kirk; Scheckler, Rebecca; Barab, Sasha (2002). "Searching for Safety Online: Managing "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum". Center for Social Informatics – Indiana University. Retrieved 2009-03-29. Cite uses deprecated parameters (help) 35.Jump up ^ J. Zhao, Where Anonymity Breeds Contempt, NY Times, 29 Nov 2010. 36.^ Jump up to: a b Buckels, Erin E.; Trapnell, Paul D.; Paulhus, Delroy L. (2014). "Trolls Just Want to Have Fun". Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved 2014-02-20. Cite uses deprecated parameters (help) 37.^ Jump up to: a b Bishop, Jonathan (2013). "The effect of de-individuation of the Internet Troller on Criminal Procedure implementation: An interview with a Hater". International Journal of Cyber Criminology 7 (1). pp. 28–48. 38.Jump up ^ Cox, Ana Marie (2006-12-16). "Making Mischief on the Web". TIME. Retrieved 2009-03-24. 39.Jump up ^ Saunders, Anne (2006-09-27). "Bass aide resigns for fake website postings". Associated Press. Retrieved 2010-02-05. 40.Jump up ^ "Bass Aide Resigns After Posing As Democrat On Blogs". WMUR. 2006-09-26. Retrieved 2010-02-05. 41.Jump up ^ Wolcott, James (2006-10-06). "Political Pieties from a Post-Natal Drip". James Wolcott's Blog – Vanity Fair. Condé Nast. Retrieved 2009-03-25. 42.Jump up ^ Moulitsas, Markos (2008-01-09). "Dems: Ignore 'concern trolls'". TheHill.com. Capitol Hill Publishing Corp. Retrieved 2009-03-25. 43.Jump up ^ "How to be a Great Internet Troll". Fox Sports. Retrieved 2009-12-13. 44.Jump up ^ "Internet without laws a 'recipe for anarchy', 1 April 2010. Retrieved 5 April 2010. 45.Jump up ^ "Facebook takes (small) step against tribute page trolls", TG Daily, 30 March 2010. Retrieved 5 April 2010. 46.Jump up ^ Jones, Gemma (2012-09-11). "Time is up for Twitter trolls and bullies | Information, Gadgets, Mobile Phones News & Reviews". News.com.au. Retrieved 2012-09-15. 47.Jump up ^ "Twitter trolls attack radio host Ray Hadley, NRL star Robbie Farah". Herald Sun. Retrieved 2012-09-15. 48.Jump up ^ "Twitter makes moves to prevent online trolls". Herald Sun. Retrieved 2012-09-15. 49.Jump up ^ Bishop, J. (2010). "Tough on data misuse, tough on the causes of data misuse: A review of New Labour's approach to information security and regulating the misuse of digital information (1997–2010)". International Review of Law, Computers and Technology (Taylor & Francis) 24 (3): 299–208. ISSN 1364-6885. 50.Jump up ^ Tom de Castella and Virginia Brown (14 September 2011). "Trolling: Who does it and why?". BBc News Magazine (BBC News). Retrieved 14 September 2011. 51.Jump up ^ Camber, Rebecca; Neville, Simon (2011-09-14). "Sick internet 'troll' who posted vile messages and videos taunting the death of teenagers is jailed for 18 WEEKS". Daily Mail (London). Retrieved 2 February 2012. 52.Jump up ^ "England riots: Four years for Facebook incitement". BBC News. 2011-11-16. Retrieved 2 February 2012. 53.Jump up ^ "Georgia Varley-inspired trolling law is waste of time says internet campaigner". Liverpool Echo. Retrieved 2 February 2012. 54.Jump up ^ "Lancashire man JAILED over April Jones Facebook posts". The Register. 8 October 2012. Retrieved 11 December 2012. 55.Jump up ^ Fiveash, Kelly (22 October 2012). "Prosecutor seeks sports-bodies guidance on troll-hunting rulebook". The Register. Retrieved 11 December 2012. 56.^ Jump up to: a b Bond, Robert (1999). "Links, Frames, Meta-tags and Trolls". International Review of Law, Computers & Technology 13. pp. 317–323. 57.Jump up ^ "All that glisters is not (Facebook) gold", CounterMeasures: Security, Privacy & Trust (A TrendMicro Blog). Retrieved 6 April 2010. 58.Jump up ^ Dibbell, Julian (September 21, 2009). "The Assclown Offensive: How to Enrage the Church of Scientology". Wired. Retrieved October 5, 2010. Further readingBishop, J. (2012). Scope and Limitations in the Government of Wales Act 2006 for Tackling Internet Abuses in the Form of 'Flame Trolling'. Statute Law Review. Online (Subscription). Bishop, J. (2013). Examining the Concepts, Issues, and Implications of Internet Trolling. IGI Global. ISBN 1466628030. Walter, T.; Hourizi, R.; Moncur, W.; Pitsillides (2012). Does the Internet Change How We Die And Mourn? An Overview Online. External links Look up troll in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. Wikimedia Commons has media related to Trolls (Internet). Wikinews has related news: UK court jails man for trolling online tribute pages Trolling advocacy and safetyThe Trolling Academy - trolling advice, comment, and training The Troll Network - trolling discussion and comment Cyber Mentors - youth support group run by young people Get Safe Online - free expert advice on online safety Background and definitionsUsenet and Bulletin Board Abuse at DMOZ NetLingo definition Urban Dictionary definition Trolling lore and essays Trolling news and features Academic and debateSearching for Safety Online: Managing "Trolling" in a Feminist Forum Malwebolence – The World of Web Trolling; New York Times Magazine, By Mattathias Schwartz; August 3, 2008. Building relationships online with avatars and characters

A wiki

A wiki (i/ˈwɪki/ WIK-ee) is usually a web application which allows people to add, modify, or delete content in collaboration with others. Text is usually written using a simplified markup language or a rich-text editor.[1][2] While a wiki is a type of content management system, it differs from a blog or most other such systems in that the content is created without any defined owner or leader, and wikis have little implicit structure, allowing structure to emerge according to the needs of the users.[2] The encyclopedia project Wikipedia is the most popular wiki on the public web in terms of page views,[3] but there are many sites running many different kinds of wiki software. Wikis can serve many different purposes both public and private, including knowledge management, notetaking, community websites and intranets. Some permit control over different functions (levels of access). For example, editing rights may permit changing, adding or removing material. Others may permit access without enforcing access control. Other rules may also be imposed to organize content. Ward Cunningham, the developer of the first wiki software, WikiWikiWeb, originally described it as "the simplest online database that could possibly work".[4] "Wiki" (pronounced [ˈwiti] or [ˈviti]) is a Hawaiian word meaning "fast" or "quick".[5][6] Contents [hide] 1 Characteristics 1.1 Editing wiki pages 1.2 Navigation 1.3 Linking and creating pages 1.4 Searching 2 History 3 Implementations 4 Trust and security 4.1 Controlling changes 4.2 Trustworthiness 4.3 Security 4.3.1 Potential malware vector 5 Communities 5.1 Applications 5.2 WikiNodes 5.3 Participants 5.4 Growth factors 6 Conferences 7 Rules 8 Legal environment 9 See also 10 References 11 Further reading 12 External links CharacteristicsWard Cunningham and co-author Bo Leuf, in their book The Wiki Way: Quick Collaboration on the Web, described the essence of the Wiki concept as follows:[citation needed] A wiki invites all users to edit any page or to create new pages within the wiki Web site, using only a plain-vanilla Web browser without any extra add-ons. Wiki promotes meaningful topic associations between different pages by making page link creation almost intuitively easy and showing whether an intended target page exists or not. A wiki is not a carefully crafted site for casual visitors. Instead, it seeks to involve the visitor in an ongoing process of creation and collaboration that constantly changes the Web site landscape. A wiki enables communities to write documents collaboratively, using a simple markup language and a web browser. A single page in a wiki website is referred to as a "wiki page", while the entire collection of pages, which are usually well interconnected by hyperlinks, is "the wiki". A wiki is essentially a database for creating, browsing, and searching through information. A wiki allows non-linear, evolving, complex and networked text, argument and interaction.[7] A defining characteristic of wiki technology is the ease with which pages can be created and updated. Generally, there is no review before modifications are accepted. Many wikis are open to alteration by the general public without requiring registration of user accounts. Many edits can be made in real-time and appear almost instantly online. This can facilitate abuse of the system. Private wiki servers require user authentication to edit pages, and sometimes even to read them. Maged N. Kamel Boulos, Cito Maramba and Steve Wheeler write that the open wikis produce a process of Social Darwinism. "'Unfit' sentences and sections are ruthlessly culled, edited and replaced if they are not considered 'fit', which hopefully results in the evolution of a higher quality and more relevant page. Whilst such openness may invite 'vandalism' and the posting of untrue information, this same openness also makes it possible to rapidly correct or restore a 'quality' wiki page."[8] Editing wiki pagesSome wikis have an "edit" button or link directly on the page being viewed, if the user has permission to edit the page. This leads to an editing page which allows participants to structure and format wiki pages with a simplified markup language, sometimes known as wikitext (for example, starting a line of text with an asterisk often sets up a bulleted list). The style and syntax of wikitexts can vary greatly among wiki implementations,[example needed] some of which also allow HTML tags. Wikis favour plain-text editing, with fewer and simpler conventions than HTML, for indicating style and structure. Although limiting access to HTML and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS) of wikis limits user ability to alter the structure and formatting of wiki content, there are some benefits. Limited access to CSS promotes consistency in the look and feel, and having JavaScript disabled prevents a user from implementing code that may limit other users' access. MediaWiki syntax Equivalent HTML Rendered output "Take some more [[tea]]," the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly. "I've had '''nothing''' yet," Alice replied in an offended tone, "so I can't take more." "You mean you can't take ''less''?" said the Hatter. "It's very easy to take ''more'' than nothing."
"Take some more tea," the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly.
"I've had nothing yet," Alice replied in an offended tone, "so I can't take more."
"You mean you can't take less?" said the Hatter. "It's very easy to take more than nothing."
"Take some more tea," the March Hare said to Alice, very earnestly. "I've had nothing yet," Alice replied in an offended tone, "so I can't take more." "You mean you can't take less?" said the Hatter. "It's very easy to take more than nothing." Wikis can make WYSIWYG editing available to users, usually by means of JavaScript or an ActiveX control that translates graphically entered formatting instructions into the corresponding HTML tags or wikitext. In those implementations, the markup of a newly edited, marked-up version of the page is generated and submitted to the server transparently, shielding the user from this technical detail. However, WYSIWYG controls do not always provide all of the features available in wikitext, and some users prefer not to use a WYSIWYG editor. Hence, many of these sites offer some means to edit the wikitext directly. Some wikis keep a record of changes made to wiki pages; often, every version of the page is stored. This means that authors can revert to an older version of the page, should it be necessary because a mistake has been made or the page has been vandalized. Many implementations, like MediaWiki, allow users to supply an edit summary when they edit a page; this is a short piece of text summarising the changes. It is not inserted into the article, but is stored along with that revision of the page, allowing users to explain what has been done and why; this is similar to a log message when making changes to a revision-control system. NavigationWithin the text of most pages there are usually a large number of hypertext links to other pages. This form of non-linear navigation is more "native" to wiki than structured/formalized navigation schemes. That said, users can also create any number of index or table-of-contents pages, with hierarchical categorization or whatever form of organization they like. These may be challenging to maintain by hand, as multiple authors create and delete pages in an ad hoc manner. Wikis can provide one or more ways to categorize or tag pages to support the maintenance of such index pages. Some wikis have a backlink feature, which displays all pages that link to a given page. It is typical in a wiki to create links to pages that do not yet exist, as a way to invite others to share what they know about a subject new to the wiki. Linking and creating pagesLinks are created using a specific syntax, the so-called "link pattern" (also see CURIE). Originally, most wikis[citation needed] used CamelCase to name pages and create links. These are produced by capitalizing words in a phrase and removing the spaces between them (the word "CamelCase" is itself an example). While CamelCase makes linking very easy, it also leads to links which are written in a form that deviates from the standard spelling. To link to a page with a single-word title, one must abnormally capitalize one of the letters in the word (e.g. "WiKi" instead of "Wiki"). CamelCase-based wikis are instantly recognizable because they have many links with names such as "TableOfContents" and "BeginnerQuestions." It is possible for a wiki to render the visible anchor of such links "pretty" by reinserting spaces, and possibly also reverting to lower case. However, this reprocessing of the link to improve the readability of the anchor is limited by the loss of capitalization information caused by CamelCase reversal. For example, "RichardWagner" should be rendered as "Richard Wagner", whereas "PopularMusic" should be rendered as "popular music". There is no easy way to determine which capital letters should remain capitalized. As a result, many wikis now have "free linking" using brackets, and some disable CamelCase by default. SearchingMost wikis offer at least a title search, and sometimes a full-text search. The scalability of the search depends on whether the wiki engine uses a database. Some wikis, such as PmWiki, use flat files.[9] MediaWiki's first versions used flat files, but it was rewritten by Lee Daniel Crocker in the early 2000s to be a database application. Indexed database access is necessary for high speed searches on large wikis. Alternatively, external search engines such as Google Search can sometimes be used on wikis with limited searching functions in order to obtain more precise results. HistoryMain article: History of wikis Wiki Wiki Shuttle at Honolulu International AirportWikiWikiWeb was the first wiki.[10] Ward Cunningham started developing WikiWikiWeb in Portland, Oregon, in 1994, and installed it on the Internet domain c2.com on March 25, 1995. It was named by Cunningham, who remembered a Honolulu International Airport counter employee telling him to take the "Wiki Wiki Shuttle" bus that runs between the airport's terminals. According to Cunningham, "I chose wiki-wiki as an alliterative substitute for 'quick' and thereby avoided naming this stuff quick-web."[11][12] Cunningham was in part inspired by Apple's HyperCard, which he had used before but which was single-user.[13] Apple had designed a system allowing users to create virtual "card stacks" supporting links among the various cards. Cunningham developed Vannevar Bush's ideas by allowing users to "comment on and change one another's text."[1][14] Cunningham says his goals were to link together the experiences of multiple people to create a new literature to document programming patterns, and to harness people's natural desire to talk and tell stories with a technology that would feel comfortable to those not used to "authoring".[13] Wikipedia became the most famous wiki site, entering the top ten most popular websites in 2007. In the early 2000s, wikis were increasingly adopted in enterprise as collaborative software. Common uses included project communication, intranets, and documentation, initially for technical users. Some companies use wikis as their only collaborative software and as a replacement for static intranets, and some schools and universities use wikis to enhance group learning. There may be greater use of wikis behind firewalls than on the public Internet. On March 15, 2007, the word wiki was listed in the online Oxford English Dictionary.[15] ImplementationsWiki software is a type of collaborative software that runs a wiki system, allowing web pages to be created and edited using a common web browser. It may be implemented as a series of scripts behind an existing web server, or as a standalone application server that runs on one or more web servers. The content is stored in a file system, and changes to the content are stored in a relational database management system. A commonly implemented software package is MediaWiki, which runs Wikipedia. See the List of wiki software for further information. Alternatively, personal wikis run as a standalone application on a single computer. WikidPad is an example. Or even single local HTML file with JavaScript inside – like TiddlyWiki. Wikis can also be created on a "wiki farm", where the server side software is implemented by the wiki farm owner. PBwiki, Socialtext, Wetpaint, and Wikia are popular examples of such services. Some wiki farms can also make private, password-protected wikis. Note that free wiki farms generally contain advertising on every page. For more information, see Comparison of wiki farms. Trust and securityControlling changes"Recent changes" redirects here. For the Wikipedia help page, see Help:Recent changes. History comparison reports highlight the changes between two revisions of a page.Wikis are generally designed with the philosophy of making it easy to correct mistakes, rather than making it difficult to make them. Thus, while wikis are very open, they provide a means to verify the validity of recent additions to the body of pages. The most prominent, on almost every wiki, is the "Recent Changes" page—a specific list numbering recent edits, or a list of edits made within a given time frame.[16] Some wikis can filter the list to remove minor edits and edits made by automatic importing scripts ("bots").[17] From the change log, other functions are accessible in most wikis: the revision history shows previous page versions and the diff feature highlights the changes between two revisions. Using the revision history, an editor can view and restore a previous version of the article. The diff feature can be used to decide whether or not this is necessary. A regular wiki user can view the diff of an edit listed on the "Recent Changes" page and, if it is an unacceptable edit, consult the history, restoring a previous revision; this process is more or less streamlined, depending on the wiki software used.[18] In case unacceptable edits are missed on the "recent changes" page, some wiki engines provide additional content control. It can be monitored to ensure that a page, or a set of pages, keeps its quality. A person willing to maintain pages will be warned of modifications to the pages, allowing him or her to verify the validity of new editions quickly.[19] A watchlist is a common implementation of this. Some wikis also implement "patrolled revisions", in which editors with the requisite credentials can mark some edits as not vandalism. A "flagged revisions" system can prevent edits from going live until they have been reviewed.[20] TrustworthinessCritics of publicly editable wiki systems argue that these systems could be easily tampered with, while proponents argue that the community of users can catch malicious content and correct it.[1] Lars Aronsson, a data systems specialist, summarizes the controversy as follows: Most people, when they first learn about the wiki concept, assume that a Web site that can be edited by anybody would soon be rendered useless by destructive input. It sounds like offering free spray cans next to a grey concrete wall. The only likely outcome would be ugly graffiti and simple tagging, and many artistic efforts would not be long lived. Still, it seems to work very well.[10] High editorial standards in medicine have led to the idea of expert-moderated wikis.[21] Some wikis allow one to link to specific versions of articles, which has been useful to the scientific community, in that expert peer reviewers could analyse articles, improve them and provide links to the trusted version of that article.[22] Noveck points out that "participants are accredited by members of the wiki community, who have a vested interest in preserving the quality of the work product, on the basis of their ongoing participation." On controversial topics that have been subject to disruptive editing, a wiki may restrict editing to registered users.[23] SecurityThe open philosophy of wiki - allowing anyone to edit content, does not ensure that every editor's intentions are well-mannered. For example, vandalism (changing wiki content to something offensive or nonsensical) can be a major problem. On larger wiki sites, such as those run by the Wikimedia Foundation, vandalism can go unnoticed for some period of time. Wikis, because of their open access nature, are susceptible to intentional disruption, known as "trolling". Wikis tend to take a soft-security[24][unreliable source] approach to the problem of vandalism; making damage easy to undo rather than attempting to prevent damage. Larger wikis often employ sophisticated methods, such as bots that automatically identify and revert vandalism and JavaScript enhancements that show characters that have been added in each edit. In this way vandalism can be limited to just "minor vandalism" or "sneaky vandalism", where the characters added/eliminated are so few that bots do not identify them and users do not pay much attention to them.[25][unreliable source] The amount of vandalism a wiki receives depends on how open the wiki is. For instance, some wikis allow unregistered users, identified by their IP addresses, to edit content, whilst others limit this function to just registered users. Most wikis allow anonymous editing without an account,[26] but give registered users additional editing functions; on most wikis, becoming a registered user is a short and simple process. Some wikis require an additional waiting period before gaining access to certain tools. For example, on the English Wikipedia, registered users can rename pages only if their account is at least four days old. Other wikis such as the Portuguese Wikipedia use an editing requirement instead of a time requirement, granting extra tools after the user has made a certain number of edits to prove their trustworthiness and usefulness as an editor. Vandalism of Wikipedia is common (though policed and usually reverted) because it is extremely open, allowing anyone with a computer and Internet access to edit it, but making it grow rapidly. In contrast, Citizendium requires an editor's real name and short autobiography, affecting the growth of the wiki but sometimes helping stop vandalism. Edit wars can also occur as users repetitively revert a page to the version they favor. Some wiki software allows an administrator to stop such edit wars by locking a page from further editing until a decision has been made on what version of the page would be most appropriate.[7] Some wikis are in a better position than others to control behavior due to governance structures existing outside the wiki. For instance, a college teacher can create incentives for students to behave themselves on a class wiki they administer, by limiting editing to logged-in users and pointing out that all contributions can be traced back to the contributors. Bad behavior can then be dealt with in accordance with university policies.[9] Potential malware vectorMalware can also be problem, as users can add links to sites hosting malicious code. For example, a German Wikipedia article about the Blaster Worm was edited to include a hyperlink to a malicious website. Users of vulnerable Microsoft Windows systems who followed the link would be infected.[7] A countermeasure is the use of software that prevents users from saving an edit that contains a link to a site listed on a blacklist of malware sites.[27] CommunitiesApplicationsThe English Wikipedia has the largest user base among wikis on the World Wide Web[28] and ranks in the top 10 among all Web sites in terms of traffic.[29][needs update] Other large wikis include the WikiWikiWeb, Memory Alpha, Wikivoyage and Susning.nu, a Swedish-language knowledge base. Medical and health-related wiki examples include Ganfyd, an online collaborative medical reference that is edited by medical professionals and invited non-medical experts.[8] Many wiki communities are private, particularly within enterprises. They are often used as internal documentation for in-house systems and applications. Some companies use wikis to allow customers to help produce software documentation.[30] A study of corporate wiki users found that they could be divided into "synthesizers" and "adders" of content. Synthesizers' frequency of contribution was affected more by their impact on other wiki users, while adders' contribution frequency was affected more by being able to accomplish their immediate work.[31] In 2005, the Gartner Group, noting the increasing popularity of wikis, estimated that they would become mainstream collaboration tools in at least 50% of companies by 2009.[32][needs update] Wikis can be used for project management.[33][34][unreliable source] Wikis have also been used in the academic community for sharing and dissemination of information across institutional and international boundaries.[35] In those settings, they have been found useful for collaboration on grant writing, strategic planning, departmental documentation, and committee work.[36] In the mid-2000s, the increasing trend amongst industries toward collaboration was placing a heavier impetus upon educators to make students proficient in collaborative work, inspiring even greater interest in wikis being used in the classroom.[7] Wikis have found some use within the legal profession, and within government. Examples include the Central Intelligence Agency's Intellipedia, designed to share and collect intelligence, dKospedia, which was used by the American Civil Liberties Union to assist with review of documents pertaining to internment of detainees in Guantánamo Bay;[37] and the wiki of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, used to post court rules and allow practitioners to comment and ask questions. The United States Patent and Trademark Office operates Peer-to-Patent, a wiki to allow the public to collaborate on finding prior art relevant to examination of pending patent applications. Queens, New York has used a wiki to allow citizens to collaborate on the design and planning of a local park. Cornell Law School founded a wiki-based legal dictionary called Wex, whose growth has been hampered by restrictions on who can edit.[23] WikiNodesWikiNodes are pages on wikis that describe related wikis. They are usually organized as neighbors and delegates. A neighbor wiki is simply a wiki that may discuss similar content or may otherwise be of interest. A delegate wiki is a wiki that agrees to have certain content delegated to that wiki.[38] One way of finding a wiki on a specific subject is to follow the wiki-node network from wiki to wiki; another is to take a Wiki "bus tour", for example: Wikipedia's Tour Bus Stop. ParticipantsThe four basic types of users who participate in wikis are reader, author, wiki administrator and system administrator. The system administrator is responsible for installation and maintenance of the wiki engine and the container web server. The wiki administrator maintains wiki content and is provided additional functions pertaining to pages (e.g. page protection and deletion), and can adjust users' access rights by, for instance, blocking them from editing.[39] Growth factorsA study of several hundred wikis showed that a relatively high number of administrators for a given content size is likely to reduce growth;[40] that access controls restricting editing to registered users tends to reduce growth; that a lack of such access controls tends to fuel new user registration; and that higher administration ratios (i.e. admins/user) have no significant effect on content or population growth.[41] ConferencesConferences and meetings about wikis in general include: The International Symposium on Wikis (WikiSym), a conference dedicated to wiki research and practice in general. RecentChangesCamp, an unconference on wiki-related topics Conferences on specific wiki sites and applications include: Atlassian Summit, an annual conference for users of Atlassian software, including Confluence[42] RegioWikiCamp, a semi-annual unconference on "regiowikis", or wikis on cities and other geographic areas.[43] SMWCon, a bi-annual conference for users and developers of Semantic MediaWiki.[44] TikiFest, a frequently held meeting for users and developers of Tiki Wiki CMS Groupware.[45] Wikimania, an annual conference dedicated to the research and practice of Wikimedia Foundation projects like Wikipedia. RulesWikis typically have a set of rules governing user behavior. Wikipedia, for instance, has a labyrinthine set of policies and guidelines summed up in its five pillars: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; Wikipedia has a neutral point of view; Wikipedia is free content; Wikipedians should interact in a respectful and civil manner; and Wikipedia does not have firm rules. Many wikis have adopted a set of commandments. For instance, Conservapedia commands, among other things, that its editors use "B.C." rather than "B.C.E." when referring to years prior to A.D.1 and refrain from "unproductive activity."[46] One teacher instituted a commandment for a class wiki, "Wiki unto others as you would have them wiki unto you."[9] Legal environmentJoint authorship of articles, in which different users participate in correcting, editing, and compiling the finished product, can also cause editors to become tenants in common of the copyright, making it impossible to republish without the permission of all co-owners, some of whose identities may be unknown due to pseudonymous or anonymous editing.[7] However, where persons contribute to a collective work such as an encyclopedia, there is no joint ownership if the contributions are separate and distinguishable.[47] Despite most wikis' tracking of individual contributions, the action of contributing to a wiki page is still arguably one of jointly correcting, editing, or compiling which would give rise to joint ownership. Some copyright issues can be alleviated through the use of an open content license. Version 2 of the GNU Free Documentation License includes a specific provision for wiki relicensing; Creative Commons licenses are also popular. When no license is specified, an implied license to read and add content to a wiki may be deemed to exist on the grounds of business necessity and the inherent nature of a wiki, although the legal basis for such an implied license may not exist in all circumstances.[citation needed] Wikis and their users can be held liable for certain activities that occur on the wiki. If a wiki owner displays indifference and forgoes controls (such as banning copyright infringers) that he could have exercised to stop copyright infringement, he may be deemed to have authorized infringement, especially if the wiki is primarily used to infringe copyrights or obtains direct financial benefit, such as advertising revenue, from infringing activities.[7] In the United States, wikis may benefit from Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects sites that engage in "Good Samaritan" policing of harmful material, with no requirement on the quality or quantity of such self-policing.[48] However, it has also been argued that a wiki's enforcement of certain rules, such as anti-bias, verifiability, reliable sourcing, and no-original-research policies, could pose legal risks.[49] When defamation occurs on a wiki, theoretically all users of the wiki can be held liable, because any of them had the ability to remove or amend the defamatory material from the "publication." It remains to be seen whether wikis will be regarded as more akin to an internet service provider, which is generally not held liable due to its lack of control over publications' contents, than a publisher.[7] It has been recommended that trademark owners monitor what information is presented about their trademarks on wikis, since courts may use such content as evidence pertaining to public perceptions. Joshua Jarvis notes, "Once misinformation is identified, the trade mark owner can simply edit the entry."[50] See also Internet portal Comparison of wiki software Content management system Dispersed knowledge History of wikis List of wikis Mass collaboration Universal Edit Button Wikis and education References1.^ Jump up to: a b c "wiki", Encyclopædia Britannica (London: Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc.) 1, 2007, retrieved April 10, 2008 2.^ Jump up to: a b Mitchell, Scott (July 2008), Easy Wiki Hosting, Scott Hanselman's blog, and Snagging Screens, MSDN Magazine, retrieved March 9, 2010 3.Jump up ^ Top Ten Wiki Engines 4.Jump up ^ Cunningham, Ward (June 27, 2002), What is a Wiki, WikiWikiWeb, retrieved April 10, 2008 5.Jump up ^ Hawaiian Words; Hawaiian to English [Retrieved September 19, 2008]. 6.Jump up ^ Hasan, Heather (2012), Wikipedia, 3.5 million articles and counting, Rosen Publishing, p. 11, ISBN 9781448855575 7.^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g Black, Peter; Delaney, Hayden; Fitzgerald, Brian (2007), Legal Issues for Wikis: The Challenge of User-generated and Peer-produced Knowledge, Content and Culture 14, eLaw J. 8.^ Jump up to: a b MNK Boulos, I Maramba, S Wheeler (2006), "Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education", BMC medical education (BMC Medical Education) 6: 41, doi:10.1186/1472-6920-6-41, PMC 1564136, PMID 16911779 9.^ Jump up to: a b c Naomi Augar, Ruth Raitman and Wanlei Zhou (2004), Teaching and learning online with wikis, Beyond the comfort zone 10.^ Jump up to: a b Ebersbach 2008, p. 10 11.Jump up ^ Cunningham, Ward (November 1, 2003), Correspondence on the Etymology of Wiki, WikiWikiWeb, retrieved March 9, 2007 12.Jump up ^ Cunningham, Ward (February 25, 2008), Wiki History, WikiWikiWeb, retrieved March 9, 2007 13.^ Jump up to: a b http://www.artima.com/intv/wiki.html 14.Jump up ^ Cunningham, Ward (July 26, 2007), Wiki Wiki Hyper Card, WikiWikiWeb, retrieved March 9, 2007 15.Jump up ^ Diamond, Graeme (March 1, 2007), March 2007 new words, OED, Oxford University Press, retrieved March 16, 2007 16.Jump up ^ Ebersbach 2008, p. 20 17.Jump up ^ Ebersbach 2008, p. 54 18.Jump up ^ Ebersbach 2008, p. 178 19.Jump up ^ Ebersbach 2008, p. 109 20.Jump up ^ Goldman, Eric, Wikipedia's Labor Squeeze and its Consequences 8, Journal on Telecommunications and High Technology Law 21.Jump up ^ Eugene Barsky; Dean Giustini (December 2007), "Introducing Web 2.0: wikis for health librarians", Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association 28 (4): 147–150, retrieved November 7, 2011. ISSN 1708-6892 22.Jump up ^ Kevin Yager (March 16, 2006), "Wiki ware could harness the Internet for science", Nature (Nature) 440 (7082): 278, Bibcode:2006Natur.440..278Y, doi:10.1038/440278a (subscription required) 23.^ Jump up to: a b Noveck, Beth Simone (March 2007), "Wikipedia and the Future of Legal Education", Journal of Legal Education 57 (1) (subscription required) 24.Jump up ^ Soft Security, UseModWiki, September 20, 2006, retrieved March 9, 2007 25.Jump up ^ "Security — Assothink Wiki" (in French). M3m.homelinux.org. Retrieved 2013-02-16. 26.Jump up ^ Ebersbach 2008, p. 108 27.Jump up ^ Meta.wikimedia.org 28.Jump up ^ WikiStats by S23, S23Wiki, April 3, 2008, retrieved April 7, 2007 29.Jump up ^ Alexa Web Search – Top 500, Alexa Internet, retrieved April 15, 2008 30.Jump up ^ C Müller, L Birn (September 6–8, 2006), Wikis for Collaborative Software Documentation, Proceedings of I-KNOW ’06 31.Jump up ^ A Majchrzak, C Wagner, D Yates (2006), "Corporate wiki users", Corporate wiki users: results of a survey, Symposium on Wikis, p. 99, doi:10.1145/1149453.1149472, ISBN 1-59593-413-8, retrieved April 25, 2011 32.Jump up ^ Conlin, Michelle (November 28, 2005), E-Mail Is So Five Minutes Ago, Businessweek 33.Jump up ^ HomePage [Retrieved 8 May 2012]. 34.Jump up ^ Ways to Wiki: Project Management; 2010-01-04. 35.Jump up ^ MM Wanderley, D Birnbaum, J Malloch (2006), New Interfaces For Musical Expression, IRCAM – Centre Pompidou, p. 180, ISBN 2-84426-314-3 36.Jump up ^ Nancy T. Lombardo (June 2008), Putting Wikis to Work in Libraries 27 (2), Medical Reference Services Quarterly, pp. 129–145 37.Jump up ^ "SusanHu's FOIA Project UPDATE". Retrieved 2013-06-25. 38.Jump up ^ http://web.archive.org/web/20070810213702/http://wikinodes.wiki.taoriver.net/moin.fcg/FrequentlyAskedQuestions 39.Jump up ^ Cubric, Marija (2007), Analysis of the use of Wiki-based collaborations in enhancing student learning, University of Hertfordshire, retrieved April 25, 2011 40.Jump up ^ C Roth, D Taraborelli, N Gilbert (2008), Measuring wiki viability. An empirical assessment of the social dynamics of a large sample of wikis, The Centre for Research in Social Simulation, p. 3, "Figure 4 shows that having a relatively high number of administrators for a given content size is likely to reduce growth." 41.Jump up ^ C Roth, D Taraborelli, N Gilbert (2008), Measuring wiki viability. An empirical assessment of the social dynamics of a large sample of wikis, The Centre for Research in Social Simulation 42.Jump up ^ Summit.atlassian.com. Atlassian Summit homepage [Retrieved June 20, 2011]. 43.Jump up ^ Wiki.regiowiki.eu. European RegioWikiSociety homepage; June 10, 2011 [Retrieved June 20, 2011]. 44.Jump up ^ Semantic-mediawiki.org. SMWCon homepage [Retrieved June 20, 2011]. 45.Jump up ^ Tiki.org. TikiFest homepage [Retrieved June 20, 2011]. 46.Jump up ^ Conservapedia.com. Conservapedia.com; May 15, 2010 [Retrieved July 24, 2010]. 47.Jump up ^ Redwood Music Ltd v. B Feldman & Co Ltd (RPC 385), 1979 48.Jump up ^ Kathleen M. Walsh & Sarah Oh (February 23, 2010), Self-Regulation: How Wikipedia Leverages User-Generated Quality Control Under Section 230 49.Jump up ^ Myers, Ken S. (2008), "Wikimmunity: Fitting the Communications Decency Act to Wikipedia", Harvard Journal of Law and Technology (The Berkman Center for Internet and Society) 20: 163 50.Jump up ^ Jarvis, Joshua (May 2008), Police your marks in a wiki world (179), Managing Intellectual Property, pp. 101–103 Further readingEbersbach, Anja (2008), Wiki: Web Collaboration, Springer Science+Business Media, ISBN 3-540-35150-7 Leuf, Bo (April 13, 2001), The Wiki Way: Quick Collaboration on the Web, Addison–Wesley, ISBN 0-201-71499-X Mader, Stewart (December 10, 2007), Wikipatterns, John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-470-22362-6 Tapscott, Don (April 17, 2008), Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything, Portfolio Hardcover, ISBN 1-59184-193-3 External linksListen to this article (info/dl) This audio file was created from a revision of the "Wiki" article dated 2007-03-14, and does not reflect subsequent edits to the article. (Audio help) More spoken articles Wikiversity has learning materials about Wiki Wikimedia Commons has media related to Wiki software. WikiIndex, a directory of wikis Exploring with Wiki, an interview with Ward Cunningham by Bill Verners WikiMatrix, a website for comparing wiki software and hosts WikiPapers, a wiki about publications about wikis WikiTeam, a volunteer group to preserve wikis Murphy, Paula (April 2006). Topsy-turvy World of Wiki. University of California. [hide]v · t · eWikis Types Personal · Semantic · Wiki farm Components Software · Markup · Interwiki links Lists Wikis · Software · Markups and parsers Comparisons Software · Wiki farms See also History of wikis · Creole

boot virus

A boot virus can be overwriting and relocating. An overwriting boot virus overwrites MBR, DBR or FBR sector with its code preserving patrition table information or logical drive information respectively. Relocating boot viruses save the original MBR, DBR or FBR somewhere on a hard or floppy drive. Sometimes such action can destroy certain areas of a hard or floppy drive and make a disk unreadable.
All boot viruses are memory-resident. When a computer is started, boot virus code is loaded in memory. A virus traps one of BIOS functions (usually disk interrupt vector Int 13h) and stays resident in memory. A virus then monitors disk access and writes its code to boot sectors of media that is used on an infected computers. For example a boot virus started from a diskette infects a hard drive. Then a virus will infect all diskettes that are inserted in to infected computer's floppy drive.

Gold

A native element and precious metal, Gold has long been prized for its beauty, resistance to chemical attack and workability. As it is found as a native element, has a relatively low melting point (1063 degrees Celsius) and is malleable, it has been used by mankind for thousands of years.

Gold is used as a standard for international currency and is also widely used in jewelry, electronics (where its superb properties as a conductor help offset its tremendous cost), dentistry and in photographic processes.

Gold occurs in significant amounts in three main types of deposits: hydrothermal quartz veins and related deposits in metamorphic and igneous rocks; in volcanic-exhalative sulphide deposits; and in consolidated to unconsolidated placer deposits. It may also occur in contact metamorphic or hypothermal deposits (eg. Skarns), or epithermal deposits such as volcanic fumaroles. It is most commonly found as disseminated grains in Quartz veins with Pyrite and other sulphides, or as rounded grains, flakes or nuggets in placer deposits in recent to ancient stream and river deposits. Gold is often panned from such deposits by taking advantage of its high density to wash away the lighter sediments from a pan or sluice.

blog popular

What makes a blog popular? What drives page views?” These are the questions that we’ve been trying to answer over the last few weeks. We were on a mission to dig into the data and analyze the strongest parameters that influence the flow of visitors to WordPress.com blogs.
Out of the 30+ million blogs on WordPress.com, we randomly selected a sample of almost 100,000 blogs to perform a regression analysis. Here are our findings, together with a few recommendations. We hope that this provides some new information, and kudos to you in case you’ve already incorporated these tips into your blog – the data suggests that you’re on the right track. Keep it up!
Make your blog easy to follow – It almost sounds obvious, but the simplest way to build more awareness is to make it easier to do so. Make sure that you have the follow widget as visible as possible. If your readers receive a notification every time you post, or see your post in their reader, there is a much higher chance that they will revisit your blog.
Comments, Comments, Comments – The most successful blogs, we found, created and encouraged a dialogue with their readers. The best way to make people more engaged with your writing is for you to engage back and start a conversation. In your posts, encourage people to comment. Also, make sure that you reply to people’s comments and continue the dialogue. This back and forth conversation is a significant driver of page views; holding all else equal, every additional comment can potentially drive up to 18 incremental page views! You can start by simply asking follow-up questions at the end of each post: ”have you ever done X?”; “do you think Y is acceptable?”. You can read some more thoughts on how to build your audience  and how to get more comments.
Post Frequently and Regularly – Your readers want to know that you are there for them and that you are “on it”. If you post frequently and regularly and have enabled the follow feature as we mentioned above, checking your blog could become a daily routine for your readers. Even if it’s a short post, write something new as frequently as possible, and at regular intervals. (The Daily Post can help with ideas, as can the advice on how to get more traffic)
While these three tips were shown to be the most important drivers of page views in our analysis, you might consider other parameters, which we found as having a partially significant effect: syndicating your post to Twitter and Facebook (using Publicize), for example, could lead to additional page views.
Happy blogging!