Saturday, September 27, 2008

Still on the Andrew Wilkow

Even though I posted Andrew Wilkow: My New Pain in the Ass back at the beginning of March, it's one of those posts that just won't die: every week or so I get another comment, usually from a conservative troll, sans grammatical or linguistic ability, too afeared to post anything except as Anonymous.

This week was no different. Anonymous first seemed centerist, argued that aesthetic traits (whiny) are irrelevant to any argument against a person. Then:
"Most liberal statements are, in all truth, irrelevant, or crafted in a manner which simply appeals to aesthetics and the dog-like qualities."
Ah, to the crux. I replied:
Most critical conservative statements are generalizations, based on untruths, peppered with obfuscation, and punctuated with one thing the ignorant masses can hang onto, such as "he's a commie!"

Liberals also tend to be more internet savvy and understand the importance of signing posts and owning your own words.

And on a sidenote, aesthetics carries a great deal of relevance, especially when all you have to go on is the voice itself. If your word choice, tone, temperament, and speech pattern peg you - in my mind - as a collar-popping guido douchebag, there's not much you can say that can break through that. Lynn Samuels has a voice like nails on a chalkboard interrupted by a smoke detector. Hence, I don't listen.

Finally, tips for credibility. This is for you, trolls! Want to come across as intelligent? Here's how:
  • Post using your username and claim some responsibility for your words
  • Grammar and spelling are important; Firefox has built-in spellcheck.
  • Make a substantial (or humorous) post without devolving into "ur a stupid librl whoz stupid n stuff"

I know. That last one is probably asking a bit too much.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Sometimes it is just easier for a person to post as "Anonymous" then to create an account. I find your characterization of those that post anonymously as laughable. Does it really matter that they don’t have an account? I can create an account that would ensure my anonymity is just as ensured had I not created one.
So I ponder, what would make you post about trivial matters such as spelling errors and people posting anonymously as opposed to challenging them on their overall context. Is it that you simply lack the ability to attack the context of their arguments? Perhaps it is that you just have an overwhelming dislike for erroneous spelling and grammatical errors. Either way you have left yourself exposed. That certainly helps to solidify my belief that your over use of thoughtfully crafted phrases does little to mask your thoughtless insight into our current political issues. But that is just my own assessment. After all, what do I know? I’m just an American who doesn’t want to see our system of government crumble at the feet of a socialist tyrant.

Lance R. Haynie said...

While I disagree with you 100% on your comments about Andrew Wilkow. I do agree with you that people should stop posting as Anonymous.

It is hard to tell who is who when the comments are flying. As to the person who commented before me. You do not have to have an account to post.

Also, I would disagree that things like grammar and spelling are trivial. While I may not be the best in those areas; I do think that it is important to convey your message with the idea that you care about what you are saying.