Smug pro-trolling troll
The time of the smug pro-trolling trolls is probably coming to an end. Some of them have started making comments such as 'we have won' or even declare that trolls have taken over, which only a non-troll (are there any?) could really observe.
While these pronouncements are probably right, it also means that their purpose is fading away. They'll have to be replaced by new trolls, who will probably out-troll the old trolls, many of whom will become sysop vandals. Like all political movements, most of the adherents are of low integrity and require higher-integrity persons to lead/manage/moderate them. Once those higher integrity persons move on to other priorities, e.g. fixing the UN, the lower integrity trolls will remain, and probably do damage to their cause and make the movement peter out with self-contradicting claims.
 origin of the phrase
Historically, especially in the Wikipedia context, hose who share the general attitude expressed in the eg:FAQ usually refer to themselves as a smug pro-trolling troll. The term was coined during an actual excerpt from Wikipedia IRC:
"[Wikipedian]: you're not one of those smug pro-trolling trolls, are you?
[troll]: why yes actually.
[Wikipedian]: you're the lowest of the low.
[sysop IRC bans troll instantly without any chance to respond.]"
After this exchange, a noisy debate ensued about unfairness of labelling and censoring political debate, with most young participants taking the troll side. This is desirable from new troll point of view. Note also that the plural was used in the actual exchange.
 use of phrase follows wiki best practice
Deliberately using a phrase coined by a "Wikipedian" is one way to write for the enemy: describing oneself in terms that the enemy prefers. This was also how the original troll terms arose, and why troll ontology has the name that it does.