Based on interviews of anonymous, self-identifying Internet trolls, the few researchers and journalists who have succeeded in garnering cooperation from these social deviants have outlined common professed motives for their antisocial behaviors, which reveal moral ambiguity and a disregard for traditional social rules of conduct. Interviews of trolls reveal that most trolls engage in deceptive and disruptive practices online, motivated by the sheer entertainment value of inflaming conflict and damaging online communities, plots of revenge on certain individuals or entire online communities, and the opportunity to oppose authority (Shachaf & Hara, 2010; Phillips, 2011; Herring, 2002; Phillips 2011) Almost all the trolls they interviewed expressed that they troll primarily for the genuine enjoyment they receive in deceiving and disrupting other users, which they refer to as “lulz,” a “a particular kind of aggressive, morally ambiguous laughter indicating the infliction of emotional distress" (Shachaf & Hara, 2010; Phillips, 2010; Shwartz, 2008). Phillips (2011) maintains that “the precise nature of this distress is secondary, if not downright inconsequential, to the enjoyment of its effects.” Furthermore, Shwartz (2008) describes “lulz” as “how trolls keep score,” indicating that trolls treat the opportunity to cause emotional distress to others like a game. Trolls’ assertions that they derive pleasure from other people’s pain reflect a complete abandonment of social and moral boundaries. Secondly, researchers discovered that several trolls attacked others online for the purpose of seeking revenge on “newbies,” or inexperienced CMC users, and individuals or particular online communities that demonstrate great emotional sensitivity (Schachaf & Hara, 2010; Phillips, 2011; Shwartz, 2008). One troll in particular, who operates under the pseudonym Paulie Socash, believes that “the underlying philosophical purpose or shared goal..(of the trolling community)..is to disrupt people’s rosy vision of the Internet as their own personal emotional safe place that serves as a proxy for real-life interactions they are lacking” (Phillips, 2011). As a RIP troller, Paulie especially condemns “grief tourists,” a term he coined to describe individuals who actively visit memorial pages of deceased individuals with whom they have no personal ties, criticizing their substitution of “online emotions and declarations of solidarity for real emotional relationships and friendship” (2011). Although Paulie reveals underlying socially constructive intentions behind his desecration of memorial websites honoring the dead, his apathy towards the emotional distress his actions can cause reflects a rearrangement of social and moral values, as he sacrifices harming others for his trolling philosophy. Lastly, several trolls share the common motive of opposing authority, especially by exercising their right to free speech (Phillips, 2011). In a recent interview, an infamous troll, known as Weev, boldly declared, “I’m out to criticize powerful people and express my First Amendment rights as an American. I think that the people in power deserve to have their lives ruined.” Furthermore, when a reporter revealed the true identity of Violentacrez, dubbed the “biggest troll on the web,” known for posting images of scantily-clad, underage girls, violence against women, racism, and misogyny, the Reddit community, which largely comprises of anonymous trolls, publicly defended the man on the grounds that he had been exercising his right to free speech (Chen, 2013). Thus, demonstrates that most Internet trolls do not espouse traditional social and moral values, instead advocating their individual constitutional rights over social and moral responsibility.