How should you deal with online trolls? It's a tricky issue and everyone has their own approach.

But can the science of game theory give us any insights into handling trolls? Well let's try and find out... #SundayThoughts

Game theory is the study of mathematical models of strategic interaction among rational decision-makers. It was developed by John Nash and John von Neumann as a way to model both conflict and cooperation between players who are striving to maximise their outcomes.

Game Theory usually reduces a complex situation into a simpler 'toy game', ascribing different points for different decisions made by players based on how these maximise or minimise the utility value from their decisions.

We can imagine a Twitter as a kind of non-cooperative game, one in which there is no external authority to establish rules which enforcing cooperative behavior. Individual actions and reactions decide if or when cooperation happens between players.

Dealing with trolls on Twitter can also be seen as a form of hawk-dove game, where one player is forced to yield to the other but tries to avoid this out of pride. It's more commonly known as playing 'Chicken'.

So can we use game theory to model the outcomes of dealing with Twitter trolls by treating it as a non-cooperation hawk-dove game?

We'll have to make a number of simplifications and assumptions, but let's see..

Let's call our model game the Troll Game. It has two players: the Tweeter (represented by ) and the Troll (represented by ).

Each round of the game starts with a move by , followed by a countermove by .

has four possible moves in this game:
- tweet something inoffensive (TI)
- tweet something controversial (TC)
- do not tweet (DNT)
- block the Troll (BTT)

TC is defined as a tweet that believes will always trigger a hostile response from .

We can now group 's four moves into two game plays:
- play DOVE (TI or DNT)
- play HAWK (TC or BTT)

In the first round of the Troll Game must play either TI or TC, otherwise cannot countermove.

can now respond with one of four moves. The first three are:
- tweet something inoffensive (TI)
- tweet something controversial (TC)
- do not tweet (DNT)

However can't block ; instead they can cause a Pile On (PO), encouraging other trolls to tweet offensively at .

Now we can group 's four moves into two Troll game plays:
- play DOVE (TI or DNT)
- play HAWK (TC or PO)

The round ends when makes their countermove. Even if sends multiple tweets the next round doesn't start until makes their follow-up move.

The Troll Game continues round after round until:
- both and play a DOVE move, or;
- blocks , or;
- gives up and stops tweeting.

Then the game ends. We score each round and decide who won the game overall.

So how do we score the Troll game? Well we decide the utility value each move is worth for each player, based on what and are hoping to achieve.

This leads to two possible versions of the game...

Let's call the first version 'Quiet Life.' simply wants to tweet without being trolled by , or without acting like a troll themselves:
- if plays DOVE they win 1 point.
- if plays HAWK they win no points.

Basically strongly dislikes conflict!

finds trolling other people very rewarding: they win 2 points for every HAWK move they make. They win no points for playing DOVE.

only plays HAWK when they are triggered by . But is never sure what will trigger . Even a TI move by will trigger 50% of the time.

Now we compute how different strategies work out for playing the 'Quiet Life' game.

Well iit's bad news: they only win 50% of single round games by playing DOVE and lose all multi-round games. Most strategies leave winning the game on points!

Now let's play a different version of the Troll Game, one we will call 'Right To Speak'. Here wants to say what they really think and will deal with if and when they reply.

In this version we score a bit differently...

In 'Right To Speak':
- if plays DOVE they still win 1 point.
- but if plays HAWK they also win 1 point.

Avoiding is no longer a neutral outcome for in this game.

Is scored the same as in 'Quiet Life': 2 points for HAWK and no points for DOVE.

Now we calculate the game and we find something interesting:
- if plays either HAWK or DOVE in round 1 and then plays BTT in round 2 the game always ends in a draw.
- if plays any other move in round 2 then always wins on points.

So, based on these examples, game theory suggests that should:
- always play the 'Right To Speak' version of the Troll game.
- should always block as soon as plays a hawk move.

Now game theory is only a tool and only as good as the assumptions you feed it. But I hope this thread helps you feel that you do have strategic options in dealing with Twitter trolls. Judge people on their actions and know what your bottom line is!

Stay positive everyone...