Even the gnaa and the penis bird and all that sort of thing, although typically labeled -1, troll by slashdot's moderation system (because that's the best fitting option in the list - the obvious absurdity ruling out using "flamebait" instead), were really not getting at the original (and semantically unique) sense of the term [0] as it existed during the Usenet days when it first appeared.
"The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it."
I think for me the turning point as an inveterate troll was learning about seriously sociopathic nihilistic groups like Queer [n-word] for Satan who would no-kidding bully and doxx vulnerable people. My attempting to get a rise out of the clueless was nothing compared to that kind of monstrousness.
I think I may have given a late estimate for the turning point of the word troll, because even by the time slashdot came around and usenet had already gone into steep decline, the usage has started to shift away from "trolling-as-in-fishing-technique" craftwork and toward "trolling-as-in-attention-seeking-monster's-petty-sadism."
The former requires ever greater refinement to improve upon, while the latter requires merely ever increasing tolerance for banal cruelty, leading to the situation you described.
There are no distinct boundaries between griefing, trolling and flamebaiting. I'd argue the groups with intentionally offensive names are griefers by default. Is intentionally triggering a negative reaction in someone for lulz using an off-topic comment and claiming "it's just a joke, bro" trolling, flamebaiting or griefing? Depends who you ask, but I'm glad none of the overt versions of the three are welcome on HN.
>> The crucial quality that a troll is best executed with as much subtlety as possible so as not to be detected by the intended target
> Yeah.. noo. Who told you this? This is wrong on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin.
It's literally the classic definition of an internet troll. The whole point was to subtly push other people's buttons to get them to do something interesting.
See this semi-famous example: https://gwern.net/doc/cs/2001-12-02-treginaldgibbons-isyours.... It can and did trigger a lot of geeks' impulse to pedantically correct others, be opinionated (e.g. AOL hate), and defend their hobbies against what they perceived as cultural hostility.
Yeah.. noo. Who told you this? This is wrong on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin.