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.