Why is participating in debate “trolling?” Is honest debating, done out of conviction, “trolling?” Is the view that it is “trolling” snide elitism?
I believe the point of this is that it is encouraging going to 'hostile' message boards. To use an example, a pro-abortion poster would consider Free Republic a 'hostile' message board for them, and we all would consider someone who is pro-abort a troll. Their coming here to 'debate' the merits of abortion would be trolling here.
For this particular issue, however, FR wouldn't be a 'hostile' board because we have people on all sides of the crevo debate based on some recent freeper polls that were posted.
> provide at least 10 posts defending ID that you’ve made on “hostile” websites,
To me, this doesn’t seem like a directive to simply go participate in an actual debate of Intelligent Design. They are to go somewhere like the democratunderground, start an ID topic, and provide links to it. Of course the only thing it’ll be is the student’s initial post followed by off-color one-liners then a topic lock and user banned.
Whether one agrees with ID or not, that sounds to me like “trolling” as it is commonly defined, and it seems kinda silly to get course credit for it.
Your perfesser tells you what your view to be and where to post to qualify for grade. that redefines "honest".