The Trolling Disease

Trolling is a relatively new term used to describe online behaviour that is disruptive, offensive and hurtful toward other internet users.


Almost half the population of the planet now has access to the internet, with about one in three of those people regularly active on social media.
Unfortunately social media has spawned a new disease, often with devastating consequences – trolling.


Trolling is a relatively new term used to describe online behaviour that is disruptive, offensive and hurtful toward other internet users. Trolls intend to provoke a reaction from others that allows for an escalation in their abusive behaviour. The extent to which they participate in negative behaviour can range from annoyance to extreme cruelty, such as posting abusive messages on memorial pages.

Are trolls ordinary people living ordinary lives until they are online? And why do some people behave in a more aggressive, disrespectful and hurtful way online than in a face-to-face interaction? So what makes a troll tick?

Trolls must have an audience to witness their antics – and this aspect appears to play a major part in the pleasure they experience. Trolls use a baiting tactic to find victims who will provide them with the most entertainment. People who take the bait are then considered fair game by the trolls.

Trolling has been explained by a psychological concept called the “online disinhibition effect”.

Sometimes people share very personal things about themselves. They reveal secret

emotions, fears, wishes. They show unusual acts of kindness and generosity, sometimes going out of their way to help others. This is benign disinhibition.

On the other hand we witness rude language, harsh criticisms, anger, hatred, even threats.  This is toxic disinhibition.

Whether benign, toxic, or a mixture of both, what causes this online disinhibition?

 With the exception of webcams, people on many social platforms are invisible to one

another, there is no eye  contact. The gaze of a person’s eyes has been shown to inhibit negative behaviour. Eye contact increases self-awareness, empathy and the awareness of other people’s reactions to what is being discussed.

The cover of anonymity allows the troll to treat the internet as their personal playground, throwing provocative comments into forums like stun grenades into a crowd.

A 2014 study found that people with higher levels of sadism, psychopathy and Machiavellianism were more likely to engage in online trolling behaviour. Of all personality measures, sadism showed the most robust associations with trolling and, importantly, the relationship was specific to trolling behaviour. Therefore cyber-trolling appears to be an Internet manifestation of everyday sadism. Such individuals are likely to enjoy inflicting psychological pain and distress on others.

What motivates individuals to engage in trolling behaviours? The rewarding feelings and social pleasure derived from creating social discord, through selfish or self-serving behaviours and interactions, and knowing that others are annoyed by it. The more negative social impact the troll has, the more their behaviour is reinforced. If behaviour is rewarding, an individual is more likely to do it.

Happily, this discovery suggests an easy way to deal with trolls: ignore them, rather than giving them the satisfaction of an angry reaction. If they don’t receive that negative social reward, then their motivation to engage in this behaviour will likely diminish.

So it appears that the classic internet adage really does hold true: don’t feed the trolls. Deny them the pleasure of an angry reaction, and they’ll probably leave you alone.

Trolling is different from Cyber-bullying, but that is another story.

This BLOG was first published in the Franklin County News on Tuesday 30 January 2018

First solution not usually the right one

This BLOG was first published in the Franklin County News on Thursday 11th January 2018.

How often have you attended a meeting where creative thinking was met with, ‘it won’t work’ ‘we don’t work like that here’ ‘you are new and don’t understand’? Similarly, how often have you seen the first idea being the best idea, or only idea?
In meetings looking for solutions to problems or in brainstorming creative sessions, we have an unfortunate tendency to seize, and often in an act of group think, on the first best solution that presents. And even worse, if on analysing further, it is not sufficient to solve our problem, we try to modify the solution rather than consider alternatives.

Research has shown that the first solution is seldom the most creative and only occasionally the best. The first solution is usually the most commonplace solution, and the one most people and your competitors would adopt in the same circumstances.

There is a scientific reason why your first idea isn’t usually your best one. Our brains are lazy. The first idea we have is usually the handiest rather than the best. To get your brain to your best idea, Neurologists will tell us, the key to innovation is to distrust the first answer and send it back. Once we have cleared our minds of the obvious, we must push our minds further to come up with new ideas. This is when creativity kicks in and powers our thinking.

I think some people get involved in committees so they can indulge their predilection to rain on everyone’s parade. They have never met an idea they liked.   Their perspectives are perpetually negative, their commentary destructive, hurtful, and non-productive. In fact their ongoing criticism, cynicism, and negativity can single handedly bring down a group leaving a string of casualties along the way.  Research indicates that people who do that probably don’t know what a creative idea looks like.

Creative ideas are by definition novel and that can trigger feelings of uncertainty that make people uncomfortable. Uncertainty makes us less able to recognize creativity, perhaps when we need it most. People dismiss creative ideas in favour of ideas that are purely practical – tried and true.

By and large, we tend to be threatened by creativity, and are eager to shut it down.

Neither intelligence of the smartest member, nor the average intelligence of the group, influences the overall group intelligence. Instead, social sensitivity, the ability to understand the feelings and thoughts of others, is the most important factor that influences the overall group intelligence.

There is always an opportunity hidden within a problem. And rather than being a problem solver we should look to become solution creators. The process of having original ideas that add value is individual and individuals in a group situation will only contribute in a positive, encouraging environment. If people are scared of being mocked then they are going to be reluctant to step forward with new ideas.

Encouraging multiple perspectives, diverse viewpoints and out of the box thinking increases dramatically the chance of finding not just the best idea but the right idea.

Not as simple as getting off the Couch

This BLOG was first published in the Franklin County News on Wednesday 21st December 2017.

The Government announced they would consider some ‘work for the dole’ type schemes and Shane Jones, the list MP for NZ First, now Regional Economic Development Minister announced, “...there will be no more sitting on the couch.”

The mainstream media, missing the point, indulged itself in what can only be called pedantic roughhouse diversionary reporting.

Our culture has an expectation that everyone that can work will (or be at home looking after the kids). The belief is, “...it saves us from the dullness and boredom of life. It puts our energies to a proper use. Unused energies create disorder in us. They make us physically unhealthy and mentally unhappy. Time hangs heavy on our shoulders when there is no work.” Hence the old adage ‘the devil finds work for idle hands’.

If we look around us, for the most part we will see that everyone is busy. Work is an important part of our lives. We might ask if it has come to the point where it has taken over our lives. But that is another discussion.

Everything we now do is tied in some way to work. So when people are not working, especially if they are capable of work, and if we are paying them as well, we tend to have a not so understanding or kindly view of them. Such people are quickly typecast as malingerers and wasters, probably lying on the couch drinking or on drugs all day.

We search diligently for examples to prove and justify our prejudicial bias. And the media is always there to help reinforce our view.

To most thoughtful people, unemployment benefits embody a painful trade-off. They are the mark of a civilized society, clubbing together to provide assistance to those in need. But do unemployment benefits really encourage people to duck work?

The benefit protects people who find themselves out of work from having to rush into an unsuitable job. It is nothing to celebrate if an unemployed person cannot afford to spend months finding a job which they are qualified for but are forced to accept the first available job, be it unsuitable, to put food on the table.

Of course that begs the question ‘where are the jobs all these people are going to?

Famous economists from all schools of thought say that you have serious problems if you have 10% of the workforce out of work. Let us remember where Shane Jones is, the level is sometimes double that.

Some will argue that a level of unemployment is good for the economy. Good for whom I can guess, but certainly not for those unemployed.

The Employers & Manufacturers Association tells us 72% of employers surveyed find it difficult or very difficult to recruit staff in skilled positions. 65% say there is, or soon will be, a skills shortage in their industry sector. 56% are expecting their businesses to grow over the next six months.

Hello, is anyone doing the maths?

Land for Food or Houses

This column was first published in the Franklin County News on 5th December 2017.

There will be many among our community who will remember, vividly, the Auckland Super City proposal debate. It got pretty rough at times. There was the incident where the then Auckland City Mayor, John Banks, mistakenly sent a text to the Mayor of North Shore, Andrew Williams, calling him a lunatic. The Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey tried to be a peace maker and was accused of “elitist bullshit” by the Auckland Regional Council Mike Lee.

Rodney Hide was the Government Minister promoting one council, one mayor with 20-30 Local Boards for the greater Auckland region.

Our then District Council led by Mayor Mark Ball organised a number of public meetings asking me to chair some of them. The most notable for me was the packed Pukekohe Town Hall meeting. It was packed and after the various speakers had finished their pieces the floor was open and there was no shortage of folk wanting to say their piece, and pretty determined they were too.

A major source of contention was that it was a land grab to build houses for the burgeoning Auckland population and Franklin was one of the biggest areas of A class growing soils in the country.

The debate on land use has arisen again as those houses are being built on what were once productive market gardens and farms. At the same time we got a sharp reminder how vulnerable the food supply is when a very wet winter made both growing and harvesting difficult and some vegetable supplies reduced.

Since 2001 NZ has lost 6,000ha of vegetable growing land. There is a misconception that we export most of our horticultural produce. Certainly we export a lot of our fruit produce but only 4% of our vegetables exported, most of it is for domestic supply. Pukekohe is one of the main growing areas for feeding NZ vegetables, especially in the spring.

Reduce the supply and it’s pretty obvious, the price goes up and maybe we even end up relying on imports for our vegetables.

European settlement of NZ usually developed around areas where the settlers could farm, firstly to feed themselves and then maybe sell surplus produce. As those areas grew in population we saw the development of service towns to include people who made their living from supporting the surrounding farming community. And that is when the dilemma began as the ‘urban’ population grew.

We are more city based than ever. With a rapidly expanding world population tipped to rise a staggering 24% from 7.5 billion today to about 9.8 billion by 2050, the world’s farmers will need to produce at least 60% more food than they currently do, if all the mouths are to be fed adequately.

According to the World Bank, if you invest in agriculture, you are two to three times more likely to have a positive impact on poverty reduction, livelihoods, and food security, than in any other sectors.

There is no doubt we need homes, there is a desperate shortage in Auckland. And that need has brought home to us the need also for a food security policy with a nationwide vision for how we feed ourselves.

A Christmas Day Story

Christmas Day was a sobering and humbling experience this year. It was the first time that Franklin Family Support and Lone Star joined together to put on a Christmas lunch for just over 120 guests who would have otherwise been alone or were families having a bit of a tough time.

Alofa Glas and Jason Goodall are business award winners and the owners of the Lone Star in Pukekohe. Their family decided to do something for other people this Christmas.  Many of their suppliers and friends got behind their idea, and this year a restaurant Christmas lunch experience was provided for many who would not otherwise have had the opportunity.

Their extended family started work at 6am and produced a great event, also providing the entertainment.

The FFSS project Manager Bonnie Reid sent invitations to people, followed up and where necessary arranged volunteers to provide transport. We began welcoming guests at 11.00am with lunch served at midday.

Just as we were about to start one of the family told me a lady had rushed out and seemed quite upset. I caught up with the guest crying in the car park. I just stood with them for a bit and was told that they couldn’t cope. They were on their own, the last member of their family alive, having just lost the sister not long before Christmas and their parents before last Christmas.

They were dreading being on their own and were overwhelmed by the happy families.

We talked a while and I asked if they would be happy sitting with someone who would look after them. They weren’t sure and were still very upset. I went in to make the arrangements and whilst explaining to Bonnie became a bit emotionally overwhelmed myself. Anyway I got the story out and we arranged for another of our team to look after the guest. They agreed to come back in with me, and I held her hand whilst we walked through all the people to Yvonne who with her husband took the guest under their wing.

Before dessert Father Christmas arrived in a fire engine with lights, siren and claxon. Well you couldn’t have turned kids on faster, like supercharged energiser bunnies! Through the generosity of donors, every child got an appropriate gift and had their photo taken with a great Santa. The delight was truly heart-warming.

Some of the guests shared their stories with volunteers as they expressed their appreciation and gratitude for the opportunity to join us for Christmas lunch.

Later on I saw the guest I mentioned earlier outside again so we had a chat. They were so afraid of being alone and thought next year they might become a volunteer after experiencing first-hand what so many volunteers were doing that day. We talked about that and I offered some ideas and invited them to come by in the New Year.

Rhys Coffin from We Love Pukekohe came by and interviewed some of the guests. He was touched by their stories and got permission from some to relate them on the site. Andrew Bayly, our local MP came by and spent a lot of time meeting guests and talking with them.

After the guests were farewelled and the restaurant was cleared and cleaned, the family and volunteers still there sat down to have lunch on leftovers. They were all pleased how well the event had gone. Many were emotionally exhausted, realising how life really was for many people.

What a day. We came home and just collapsed, overwhelmed by the whole thing really. The generosity of those who provided supplies and presents for the children; the family for their hard work providing the event; the volunteers who helped provide for so many guests. And the guests themselves who were so appreciative.

All in all a special day.