Sometimes yes, just like in real life. Not always through.
What is complicity through, is to favoring trolls speech. Telling troll victim to shut up or to tell him that what is happening to him is because he was not sufficiently silent.
Sometimes, trolling is crazies. Other times, and quite often, it is tactic to shut up opponents. And it works and used to work. People who ignored trolls are not to be heard, because trolling stopped their speech.
And yet other times, what you call troll is someone espousing genuine opinion, but it is too comfortable and politically beneficial to pretend it does not exists.
A: "Nobody is saying X!"
B: "This person here is saying X, I am getting tons of messages to that effect!"
A: "These are just trolls! It is all ironical and they dont count!"
If you are invested in people claiming X is not existing or not an issue, then it is comfortable to pretend that anyone who say X is a troll. But often they are not. They are expressing their opinions or are trying push others toward that opinion.
That part of about people who will insist that someone is troll to stop discussion, because they dont like the discussion against said person. It was not meant to be about people who simply do not cared about the whole thing, decided this is not the case where they will join the argument.
I am definitely not saying that everyone must join every single argument or outraged group on the internet.
What is complicity through, is to favoring trolls speech. Telling troll victim to shut up or to tell him that what is happening to him is because he was not sufficiently silent.
Sometimes, trolling is crazies. Other times, and quite often, it is tactic to shut up opponents. And it works and used to work. People who ignored trolls are not to be heard, because trolling stopped their speech.
And yet other times, what you call troll is someone espousing genuine opinion, but it is too comfortable and politically beneficial to pretend it does not exists.