Quote:
Originally Posted by Someone
Never attribute to stupidity that which is adequately explained by malice.
|
Nevertheless, where behavior which may be explained by either stupidity or trolling shares certain similarities to trolling behavior, it ought to place a burden on the alleged troll to rebut the allegation of trolling. Like, if A alleges that B is trolling and A then proceeds to produce evidence of posts by B generally recognized (according to a reasonable person standard) to be consistent with trolling, B should then be required to produce evidence of his or her own stupidity to rebut A's prima facie case of trollery, or face banning.
SlackWit, for instance, undermined his own case with those ACT scores. Not that they proved he wasn’t stupid. Only that, to the extent they might have given weight towards one factor over another, they were not conclusive towards stupidity. Not so much a tiebreaker as a "makeweight" I suppose.