Wednesday, February 2, 2011

What Is A Troll?

From Wikipedia (The Free Encyclopedia) Wikipedia Link:


"Do not feed the trolls" and its abbreviation "DNFTT."

They see me Troll'n...They Hate'n...

In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion. In addition to the offending poster, the noun troll can also refer to the provocative message itself, as in "that was an excellent troll you posted". While the term troll and its associated action trolling are primarily associated with Internet discourse, media attention in recent years has made such labels highly subjective, with trolling being used to describe intentionally provocative actions outside of an online context. For example, recent media accounts have used the term troll to describe "a person who defaces internet tribute sites with the aim of causing grief to families."

From Urban Dictionary Urban Dictionary Link:


One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument by Alien Entity Sep 22, 2002

A Troll is also a toy doll once popular in America.


An Excellent "How to Handle Trolls" webpage can be found at this link:

Please don't act like a Troll on patrol (at serious, or Educational websites)!

Consider that there may be great places to Troll about...

"Trolling" from a different Perspective:

For example, According to Encyclopedia Dramatica:

Considered by some to be a "parody of an Encyclopedia:" Under "Different kinds of trolls:"

Troll for a day When a board suffers from group think and stagnation, sometimes one poster will create a new account and log in to tweak the other posters into a flame war. The Troll for a Day will announce they are a TFAD (TFADing) and everyone will congratulate the regular after getting over their murderous impulses for bring the community back to life. Posters on message boards who have experienced this behavior will immediately try to label all newcomers as "TFADs".

To read more about my personal reflections about Trolls
Visit my Sunlight Reflections blog:

Saturday, January 29, 2011

My (Incomplete) ~"People of Color" Page~ on my "Off-Wikipedia" Blog

[ This is the first Wikipedia Article I have ever written, and wanted to post. This article got deleted. This is my first "Off-Wikipedia" Informational post. ]

"Person of Color" The term "Person of Color" is commonly used to describe persons of color, [ It is commonly assumed that the person described can be of any color; technically, the term is used to describe people with skin tones similar to five of the basic colors human beings are grouped into: black, brown, red (cooper), yellow and white]. A second, less inclusive definition, of "person of color" is used to describe "any non-European non-white person." [1]

According to Wikipedia:
Person of color (plural: people of color; persons of color) is a term used, primarily in the United States, to describe all people who are not white. The term is meant to be inclusive among non-white groups, emphasizing common experiences of racism. [SIC] [2] In the United States, this particular term is slightly confusing. For example, many "white Americans" are European descendants, who may have skin pigmentations that range from light brown, to tanish-yellow, to peach, pink and white. Futhermore, many Asian-Americans have skin tones which appear white; they are considered Asian because of facial characteristics, and other identity ties. People in many large human populations express a range of skin pigmentations and skin tones. For Example, Europe has approximately 45 countries; [3] Europeans express a range of skin colors and tones. There are many dark-brown native people living in Spain, lighter-brown, or tan, people living in Romania, or, as is increasingly true, "black" British people, also known as "black Brits" [4], living today in the United Kingdom.

Is Classifying People Together under "Basic Colors" Similar to Scientific Racism?

According to Wikipedia, as a term, "scientific racism" denotes the contemporary and historical scientific theories that employ anthropology (notably physical anthropology), anthropometry, craniometry, and other disciplines, in fabricating anthropologic typologies supporting the classification of human populations into physically discrete human races. [5] Factually speaking, the Human population contains a wide variety of skin coloration; far greater then five basic colors.

The term "Person of Color" is used to describe "persons of color," the person can be described using color terminology other than red, yellow, black, brown, or white.

Why Are People Different Colors?

Human skin color is quite variable around the world. It ranges from a very dark brown among some Africans, Australians, and Melanesians to a near yellowish pink among some Northern Europeans. One noted researcher has written, "There are no people who actually have true black, white, red, or yellow skin. These are commonly used color terms that do not reflect biological reality." [6]

Photobucket Photobucket [ Image of woman found from Google Image ]

Photobucket [ Image of Yuan Xiaochao found from Google Image. ]

Photobucket [ Image of woman with a "sunburn" found from Google Image ]

What is the Difference between "Genotype" and "Phenotype?"

People who study heredity explain that most traits are geneticlly linked, but some are influenced by the environment, or the individual.

For example:

Genetic Traits: Skin color, Height, natural Hair color.

Environmentally Influenced Traits: Skin that is darkened by the sun, called by people, getting "sun-tanned," "sun-browned," or "sun-burnt."

Certain Environmentally influenced traits are the results of human activity and, or the environment. For example: People with naturally occuring brown hair may "bleach" or "dye" their hair so that it appears red or blond using hair dyes, or other natural products (such as lemon juice). Older people may use hair dyes to darken their hair in an effort to cover the "gray" hair that sometimes occur during human aging. Another example of a human influenced change in bodily appearance would be chemical hair straighteners. Using chemical "perms," a person with naturally curly hair can make their hair appear (temporarily) straight. Since hair cells (on the head's surface) are dead, using chemicals to create a "chemical change" is not painful (although the chemically changed effect fades as the chemically treated hair falls out, and is replaced by the person's natural hair growth). Scientist who study genetics may use two terms when describing a person's apperance: phenotype or genotype.

Phenotype: 1: The observable physical or biochemical characteristics of an organism, as determined by both genetic makeup and environmental influences. [7] 2: Any observable characteristic or trait of an organism. [8]

Genotype: The genotype is the genetic makeup of a cell, an organism, or an individual (i.e. the specific allele makeup of the individual) usually with reference to a specific character under consideration. [9]


1. Dictionary Link: The Free Dictionary:" 2. Wikipedia Article "Person of Color": 3. Online Link: World 4. Online Link: The New York Times "Go Back to Black" by K.A. Dilday, Feb 27, 2008 (key term: "black brits") 5. Online Link: Wikipedia Article: Scientific Racism: The Wikipedia writers include a list of refrences. The source material for the term "scientific racism" is unclear. The references include: A: term used from the 1960s, following Juan Comas B: "Ostensibly scientific": cf. Adam Kuper, Jessica Kuper (eds.), The social science encyclopedia (1996), "Racism", p. 716: "This [sc. scientific] racism entailed the use of 'scientific techniques', to sanction the belief in European and American racial superiority"; Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Questions to sociobiology (1998), "Race, theories of", p. 18: "Its exponents [sc. of scientific racism] tended to equate race with species and claimed that it constituted a scientific explanation of human history"; Terry Jay Ellingson, The myth of the noble savage (2001), 147ff. "In scientific racism, the racism was never very scientific; nor, it could at least be argued, was whatever met the qualifications of actual science ever very racist" (p. 151); Paul A. Erickson,Liam D. Murphy, A History of Anthropological Theory (2008), p. 152: "Scientific racism: Improper or incorrect science that actively or passively supports racism". 6. Online Webpage Link: Skin Color Adaptation: 7. Online definiton taken from the American Heritage Dictionary. Online Link: 8. Wikipedia Article: Phenotype: Online Link: 9. Wikipedia Article: Genotype: Online Link:

"For Colored Girls (and Gies) Who Sometimes See Rainbows

On my Wikipedia User (profile) Page (user name: C-ritah)

'''For Colored Girls (and Gies) Who Sometimes See Rainbows'''

“I remember never believing that whites were really real” -- Maya Angelou from “I Know Why The Caged Bird Sings

I, an African-American, remember believing that black people were never really real. This is a true confession. I was always called "black." I knew I was included when people said “Black is beautiful.” I remember people in high-school quoting a popular saying, “It’s a black thang, you wouldn’t understand.” Although I didn’t understand, I imagined I did. When my “White-acting” [???White acting????] friend (who dreamed of being an actor in New York) who often acted unique and original, and less "conformist," told me, “It’s a black thang, we wouldn’t understand,” I was a little offended; 'I am black,' I thought, 'I understand.'

This was the same girl-friend I grew up with from Kindergarten to graduation. We both had the same second-grade teacher, a “white” teacher, who shared the class with a tall, slender, female African-American Teacher’s Aid. I remember the day we, six and seven year-olds, asked our teacher why brown people were called "black." It was a question a lot of us kids had wondered about. Our "white" teacher said she didn’t know…which is a good answer. If you don’t know, you don’t know. The tall Teacher’s Aid didn’t have a better response, although instinctively, I felt like she knew more than she was telling. I remember our teacher telling the class to stick out our arms and hands, and come together to form a circle. We did, (with our skin touching) and we noticed all the colors we came in…brown, caramel, yellow, tan, pink, and the lightest brown. Although it was fun; I remember the other kids made me aware of being the darkest person there. I was black.

In my North Carolina public school, I learned there were eight basic colors…not more. Eight: black, brown, purple, blue, red, orange, yellow, and green. What was/is white (if not a color)? Did "white" people think that white was clear? That the color white was the same as the absence of color? My mind noticed many odd ideas, like strange spellings, and negative numbers…many ideas didn’t make sense to me, but I accepted them (somewhat). To be honest, my mind weaves through a lot of strange ideas…I am thinking of creating a new bumper sticker that many people may want to buy: Education is also UNLEARNING the Mis-education we learn.

There are a lot of things that are confusing to a young person, I think there is much confusion today. When I was in college, I remember telling a “white” person (I think of Jewish descent) that black people did not exist. I was trying to be honest and factual. I told her that most "black" people were actually brown or dark brown people. Since we (dark brown people) are dark, I told her that "white" people probably called us "black", "black" people. In my way of understanding, this made sense. I was "black," everyone I grew up around was "black," and all could clearly see that I/we was/were brown. Of course, I met other people who seemed more confused (in college), for example, a friend told me “Oprah Winfrey and Clarence Thomas are white;” this same person, told me his father (who looked to me like an Italian-American) was “black.” Later, he described himself as a brown person (which I agree with. He is brown). Obviously, I think there is a lot of confusion in America.

I watched a Christian program that showed black people. People who could not be described as any other color – but black. I noticed what I may have ignored before, black people do exist. Black is beautiful. People of color are beautiful.

Now, I live in a pre-dominantly African-American neighborhood, (which is in some ways, like the neighborhood I grew up in). Many people in my neighborhood are black. Sometimes, I am very aware of being brown…not in a fearful way... just aware… I don’t want to be accused of identity-theft [which I’ve never been accused of before…mostly, other brown people have pointed out the lighter-brown regions of my body. Yeah, I notice my multi-hued body...I wonder why they mentioned it?] I think I negated “blackness” when I believed black (people) did not exist, and replaced it with the color brown [And I think I am still confused on how to best express my confusion]. I don’t think that is healthy (for me)…I hope to better describe my reality. I hope people of all colors feel good about their accomplishments, and daily deeds. I am happy using the term African-American. Many people call themselves African-Americans, and identify with a larger group of people who are many colors. At this point, this is who I am, a brown person, who has inherited many features from my black ancestors (and probably, from ancestors of a few other colors); and I am (I think) an America citizen. It’s all good, and Black Is Beautiful!

Peace and Umoja (unity)!

My list of Nine Basic Colors:

English............. English Fonētekā............ English Pronunciation (Dictionary Version)

Black....................... Bā-lāk(ā).................................blak

Brown..................... Bā-rāo-...............................broun


Purple.................... Pər-pul.................................... pərpəl


Orange....................O-rān-................................... ôˈräNZH

Yellow.................... Yē-lo......................................... yelō

Green......................Gā-re-n(ā).............................. grēn

White...................... Y-t(ā)......................................(h)wīt

My Fonētekā Key: "Sounds Like"................... "Sounds Like The Letter in the American Alphabet"

Ā - "ah" (Aria)..................................................... A - "ae" (Apron)

Ē - "eh" (Education)............................................E - "e" (Easy)

ə - "er" or "ur" (Pur-ple) or (Gen-der)

My Unpleasant Wikipedia Experience

Please, don't get me wrong; I love Wikipedia, but...

I wanted to create a simple, (and factual) page on Wikipedia, the free Encyclopedia.

Guess what, after a few days, and fustrated "wasted" hours, I left (running in a manner of speaking).

It was not because the technology was hard to use. The software is state of the Art. It was not because there were "il-logical" or unreasonable editors, I read many, many reasonable editors. I left because I found no source of accountability. How does an "open-edited" Encyclopedia make sound policy changes? After reading precise, critical commentary with detailed suggestions, I felt hopeless...what was the point? If the editorial board could not agree with informed, reasonable, factual editors...what contributions could I hope to make?

This is what I left on the Wikipedia Page: Wikipedia talk: Article titles

Is Wikipedia Academic?

I ask the group, is Wikipedia academic or educational? I ask because I am using my local Community College Computer, and the rules state that they (the computers) are not to be used for "chat(ting)," but for academic (or Educational) purposes.

Please, don't take offense. I enjoy the "community" spirit of discussing or creating policy, I applaud group "editing" efforts, but really...

[I will use my humor here...]
Question: What is "Edu-entertainment?"
Answer: An Encycolpedia that doesn't care about facts, research, primary sources, or the author's (or artist's) intent.

I wrote this response when I read an editor [In: Wikipedia talk: Article Titles] who suggested that the Encyclopedia and its editors respect the "factual" presentation of the Author. [For example, copy the text the way it was published by the Author]. A few editors opposed this view, writing that the "common" voice or common view-point was important. I agree. On an "educational" page, both a factual, and "popular culture" viewpoint can exist; in fact, it is "educational" when the writers discuss how the original text (or name of a character) has changed (and, if there is a reason, why). I was concerned when the other editors did not agree. In my mind, an Encyclopedia should respect factual information.

I thought about it a lot. I myself had problems submitting a "People of Color" page. When the editors decided to delete my page, I asked several detailed questions, and did not get a response. Although the editors were polite, they did not respond to my questions, and deleted my work (which took hours to write and document).

So, I'm writing my own "Off-Wikipedia" Blog here.

Democracy...a Work In Progress

My English professor in college said (I will paraphase)...The effects of the French Revolution are still being felt today.

In my opinion, the experimentation in democracy is still occuring. Somedays, I think of George Orwell's book 1984, and I am convinced...if the American people were allowed...they would vote to remove the "Bill of Rights" or, (an equally depressing thought), their ancestors would have never voted for the Bill of Rights which is apart of the United States Constitution.

Did the founding fathers trick us when they didn't leave the wording of the document (The U.S Constitution) or it's meaning up to an editing by concensus board? What would The United States Constitution be like if anyone could edit it? Could you imagine, how many times the Bill of Rights would have been edited, or erased. Did you know, (according to Wikipedia) there are now documents that Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia, does not protect [from public editing]...but once did.

Later in my blog, I will recreate my original (intended to be 5-8 paragraphs, factual, and well documentated) "People of Color" Page, with pictures.

For now, I will share the suggestions I made (my pseudonym is C-Ritah) to the Wikipedia board, although I felt like working (writing and collecting information) was a waste of my time.

My Advice to Wikipedia:

Consider Cross-Linking Information. Did you know that one of the "revolutionary" benifits of using a computer is that you can cross-link information (related articles...that are similar, but present information from different perspectives).

For Example.

Consider two colors (black and white).

I am using my Dictionary as my primary source.



On one Wikipedia page, the article would present information about "Colors" based upon the "Scientific" study of Light.

The definition from this perspective would look like:


Black - 1) The achromatic object color of least lightness characteristically perceived to belong to objects that neither reflect nor transmit light. 2). Total or nearly total absence of light.

White: 1) The achomatic object color of greatest lightness characteristically perceived to belong to objects that reflect diffusely nearly all incident energy throughout the visible spectrum.

This page would be "Cross-Linked" with another (similar) page, also called "Colors"


This page would present Information about Colors from an Industral or "Everyday" Perspective.

The definitions from this perspective would look like:

Black - 1). A black pigment or dye. 2) Of or relating to a group or race characterized by dark pigmentation.

White - 1) A white colored product (as flour, sugar or [My insert: white paint, or white pigment].
2) Being a member of a group or race characterized by reduced pigmentation.

This page would be "cross-linked" with another, similar page which could be called "Colors"


This page would present information about Colors as found (or defined) "symbolically" in Western Literature.

The definition from this perspective would look like:

Black: - 1) Soiled, dirty
2) Thourghly evil, wicked. 3) Gloomy, Calamitious.

White: 1) Marked by upright fairness, free from spot or blemish. 2) Innocent 3) Not intended to cause harm (such as a white lie or white magic).

These pages could be "Cross-Linked" with a similar pages such as:

"Colors" as defined or used "Symbolically" in Eastern Literature

"Colors" as defined or used "symbolically" in African Culture and Literature

"Colors" as defined or used "symbolically" in Latin Literature....

My point: I don't think articles with similar (or the same) title is (necessarily) the problem.

I think an electronic (factual) Encyclopedia that supports "electronic-links," and "cross-linked" information would create effective, and unique information layouts.

...can you believe they had a help section (on the Wikipedia site) under Technical Information: Editing articles of such length that you can't edit them.

[ If you are interested in what I consider to be both a factual and educational Wikipedia article, consider visiting this link: ]