Friday, August 16, 2013

Troll Eruptions

Last night, something strange happened at Progressive Eruptions. Suddenly, Shaw Kenawe had morphed into Shaw Kenawe, The Wicked Witch of the Blogosphere! Either someone hacked into Shaw’s profile, or Shaw is participating in a hoax. Whether trolling or masquerading as a troll, pranks – no matter how seemingly harmless - are neither amusing nor funny. How often have we read accounts of online harassment, character assassination, threats of violence, or stories of teenage suicides due to bullying in Cyberspace!

Adrenaline is an addictive drug that promotes socially communicable aggression, and trolls are notorious adrenaline junkies. Let’s be perfectly blunt: Partisan blogging does not promote dialogue and debate and rarely, if ever, dissuades anyone of their opinion. Partisan blogging is motivated by self-amusement – a kind of ultimate video game - as bloggers from the left and the right taunt and engage each other in pointless and interminable arguments. How do you score this game? Trolls measure their success by the number of comments under every post – inspired, no doubt, by mischief.  Personally, none of this appeals to me.



Coincidentally, this article by Jade Walker appeared this morning, Cyber-Harassment: What the Online Community Can Do to Stop the Trolls. Containing good advice, the article is reproduced in full as follows:
The Internet is a bountiful source of information, commerce, entertainment and enlightenment. We share stories and pictures online. We cheer up our friends with encouraging messages. We read the news and share our opinions about the issues of the day. We watch funny videos and search for jobs, mates and rare copies of Ramones albums. Cyberspace is no longer a science fiction concept, but an alternate universe that exists in our reality, one that we can tap into at any time, from anywhere. 
It is a wondrous place. 
However, as in the real world, you'll also find the corrupt and depraved. Thieves will try to steal your identity. Con artists will attempt to rob you of your affection and cash. And trolls will ambush you, intent on harming your sanity, your self-worth and your reputation. 
Over the course of my 22 years in journalism, I have been threatened numerous times. Sometimes the subjects of my stories didn't like having their misdeeds aired to the public, and so they lashed out. Sometimes, the people involved were just nuts. 
I once wrote a story about an assistant fire chief who got caught driving drunk. A day later, an unidentified man left a message on my answering machine saying that if I ever have a fire at my house, don't bother calling the fire department because they wouldn't come. 
A man who was charged with sexually assaulting a woman in her dorm room once vowed to hunt me down and rape me "til I bled to death" because I had the temerity to write about the case. If only these comments could have been used at trial; it might have changed the outcome. Unfortunately, he was later acquitted because the judge said sex without a woman's consent was not rape unless the attacker used force or the threat of force. Apparently, begging him to stop the assault was not enough. 
One man was so incensed about the fact that a story on Lady Gaga had appeared on the front page of a website where I worked that he emailed and said he wanted the U.S. government to kidnap me, throw me in Guantanamo, torture me for 10 years and them dump my body on my parents' lawn. I wasn't even the person who published the innocuous profile. 
More recently, I have been cyber-harassed, and it wasn't in response to anything I had actually written or said. Instead, someone created a fake profile bearing a stranger's name and used that account to post horrible anti-Semitic comments online. Then someone apparently stole a picture from my Website and digitally added it to displays of those comments, implying that the comments came from me. Some trolls then took to their blog and to Twitter to write about it. The sum effect of all of this slandered my reputation as a journalist by alleging that I was a bigot and a coward. Such lies not only defame my character, but my employers' as well. 
People of all ages, races, religions and nationalities are considered possible marks for trolls, but female journalists are a popular target. Why just in the past month, several female journalists have been threatened with bomb attacks online. Imagine logging onto one of your favorite micro blogging sites and seeing this: 
"A BOMB HAS BEEN PLACED OUTSIDE YOUR HOME. IT WILL GO OFF AT EXACTLY 10.47PM ON A TIMER AND TRIGGER DESTROYING EVERYTHING." 
So how are we, the innocent parties, supposed to respond to these despicable actions? Here is some of the advice I've received: 
"Don't feed the trolls. Just ignore them. They'll go away." 
"You need to develop a tougher skin. It's the Internet after all." 
And my personal favorite, "Well, that's the price of fame." 
Basically, don't feed the egos of the attention-starved people who use the Internet to (often anonymously) defame, harass and frighten. Or worse, accept that this is how the world should work instead of trying to change it. 
To which, I call bullshit. 
I would not tolerate such behavior in person, and I am certainly not about to do so online. Thankfully, I'm not the only one who feels this way. Others have also decided to fight back. 
Emma Barnett, women's editor for the Telegraph in London, tried to ignore the bomb threat she received by meeting with friends at a local pub. It was, after all, just one of many online attacks she has experienced on Twitter and on her articles for years. Barnett was also reticent to contact the police because she didn't have much faith in their understanding of the problem. Barnett eventually decided to share her story online in order to launch a conversation about the best ways to deal with such abuse. 
Caroline Criado-Perez is a freelance writer and feminist campaigner who successfully lobbied the Bank of England to feature a female face (other than the Queen's) on British bank notes. For this, she received numerous online threats of rape and murder. Examples include: "Wouldn't mind tying this bitch to my stove. Hey sweetheart -- give me a shout when you're ready to be put in your place" and "Everyone report @CriadoPerez for rape and murder threats and also being a cunt #malemasterrace." 
Criado-Perez could have ignored these comments and hoped that none of the threats were serious. Instead she and other Twitter users began adding the hashtag #SHOUTINGBACK to their tweets. She also wrote a brilliant essay on the topic in which she talks about how difficult it is for people to openly discuss the issue of cyber-harassment. 
"I am making people uncomfortable. If I continue to 'feed the trolls,' I deserve all I get. Never mind that ignoring or blocking only results in new accounts being set up -- or the trolls simply finding a new victim. Never mind that my 'trolls' are trying to shut me up. Never mind: take this awkward truth away," Criado-Perez wrote. 
After learning about Criado-Perez's story, Kim Graham took to Change.org to lobby Twitter into installing a "report abuse" button on all tweets. 
"Abuse on Twitter is common; sadly too common. And it frequently goes ignored. We need Twitter to recognise that it's current reporting system is below required standards," she wrote. To date, more than 135,000 people have signed the petition. 
Catherine Mayer, TIME's Europe editor, has often been on the receiving end of sexist comments and cyber-bullying. But when she became the target of a bomb threat on Twitter and found out other female journalists had been victimized, she contacted police. 
"I think this is something that is never properly taken into account. People always say of individual incidents, 'that's not very serious is it? Don't let it bother you,'" Mayer said. "But it's the accretion of all of these incidents of low level abuse that matter, and that's very true of female journalists. Both in the virtual world, and the real world, we encounter throughout our working lives low level abuse and low level harassment all the time." 
Hadley Freeman, a columnist for the Guardian who recently received a bomb threat online, reported it to the police and then took to her column to discuss the problem of trolls. 
"It doesn't matter if you think you are fighting the feminist cause by railing at newspaper columnists who you believe are insufficiently feminist, covertly racist, blatantly transphobic or anything else. Abusing people is not a good way to get anyone to consider your complaints seriously. As Helen Lewis wrote in the New Statesman last week, 'Being a dick to people on Twitter is not activism. Hashtag truesay,'" Freeman wrote
Think Progress reporter Alyssa Rosenberg has tweeted the full names and institutional affiliations of trolls under the #ThreatoftheDay hashtag. "Threaten me," Rosenberg wrote, "and I will cheerfully do my part to make sure that when employers, potential dates, and your family Google you, they will find you expressing your desire to see a celebrity assault a blogger." 
The Everyday Sexism Project seeks to expose the breadth of the problem by cataloguing the abuse women experience on a daily basis. Since British writer Laura Bates launched the site in 2012, it has received more than 25,000 stories about women being followed, humiliated and attacked (online and off). 
The International News Safety Institute plans to study the issue as well, and will launch a global survey into violence against women journalists and the nature of the dangers they face in relation to their work, from physical threats to cyber-bulling. All women working in the news media are invited to participate. 
And then there's the unmasking option, which Gawker did in 2012 when it revealed that Michael Brutsch was actually the troll known as Violentacrez on Reddit. As writer Adrian Chen noted, "If you are capable of being offended, Brutsch has almost certainly done something that would offend you, then did his best to rub your face in it. His speciality is distributing images of scantily-clad underage girls, but as Violentacrez he also issued an unending fountain of racism, porn, gore, misogyny, incest, and exotic abominations yet unnamed, all on the sprawling online community Reddit. At the time I called Brutsch, his latest project was moderating a new section of Reddit where users posted covert photos they had taken of women in public, usually close-ups of their asses or breasts, for a voyeuristic sexual thrill." 
Brutsch was eventually fired from his real-world job after being outed. 
Now as we all know female journalists aren't the only ones being targeted by trolls. There have been way too many stories in the news about men using Craigslist to send strangers to rape ex-girlfriends, ex-employees trying get back at their former bosses by publishing defamatory comments and subscribing them to porn sites/magazines, and teens posting vicious rumors and lies about fellow students. The devastation felt by these victims is incalculable, and in some cases even led to suicide. 
This type of behavior has to stop. 
In recent years, politicians and law enforcement have stepped up efforts to combat the thieves and con artists. They've passed safety measures to battle against fraud, and created avenues for cybercrime victims to file complaints. Yet when it comes to trolls, there is generally little legal recourse. Victims can document the threats and defamatory comments, but that does not stop the abusers nor does it keep them from attacking others. So what else can we, as citizens of the Internet, do to end such atrocious behavior?
  • Education is key to changing attitudes and making clear that the denigration of women and violence against them are unacceptable, Vivienne Hayes, chief executive of the Women's Resource Centre, told CNN. "I hope the horrendous level of this kind of trolling is going to push this issue into the forefront" and prompt government action.
  • Freedom of speech has its limits, and people need to learn what they are. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. You can't threaten violence with the intent of putting someone at risk for bodily harm or death. You do not have a constitutional right to tell lies that damage or defame the reputation of a person or organization.
  • If you see something, say something. Don't allow trolls to take over your blogs or social media feeds. If you spy terrible comments, delete them. If the abusers continue to spew their hatred at you, ban their IP address. And if you notice that trolls are attacking someone else, don't ignore the problem. Stand up for the victim and make it clear that such cruelty is not acceptable under any circumstances.
  • Internet providers and Website administrators must be more proactive against threatening and defamatory speech. Earlier this month, Twitter announced that it would create an "in-tweet" report button and roll it out to all platforms. This is an excellent start. Hiring moderators, banning users who abuse others, blocking anonymous users and sharing threats with authorities would be a great second step.  
  • Train the police. Many departments are becoming savvy social media users, as evidenced by the official usage of Twitter and Facebook and Instagram and Google+ to share Amber Alerts and BOLOs. But officers also need to learn how to deal with cases of cyber-bullying, cyber-stalking and cyber-scams.
  • Arrest the perpetrators. Police in England did just that last month, in response to online threats made against Criado-Perez and politician Stella Creasy. Perhaps a bit of jail time will make trolls think twice before typing out another online threat.
  • Lastly, the Internet community must discuss this issue, and create clear and helpful guidelines for victims of online abuse.
No one should have to suffer in silence.

15 comments:

  1. Hits close to home and it probably does to many of us. Way back in my compuserve days - at was when Obama was running for the first time, I had a guy, a lawyer apparently, threaten to come and "strangle me with myown hands"

    I sent him my address. I was dumb enough to think that a complaint to Compuserve would have an effect, but really, they didn't care and didn't do anything even though making "terroristic threats" is a crime.

    More recently I complained to Blogger when some other anti-Obama bozo went so far as to register a name almost exactly like mine as set up a parody blog called "subhuman voices" full of laughable insults. Letters to Blogger went unanswered. They don't give a shit because they don't have to.

    Never mind how, but I managed to find his real name and address and e-mail, got a picture of his house from Google Earth and made him an offer he couldn't refuse. I got a long apology which I still have and he disappeared along with his blog.

    I can't recommend doing what I did, It's rarely possible, but ignoring trolls and hackers and lunatics doesn't seem to work in many cases. Arnold Forster of the Anti-Defamation League stated in his book Square One that we need to go after each and every offender aggressively and relentlessly and I think such policies work. The small time twit hasn't got the resources to defend himself and even the big guys like the KKK can be bankrupted and all but driven out of existence by relentless legal opposition.

    They think they can step on us and make us go away. They can't if we don't let them.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Captain,
    I recall your encounter with the troll from Detroit (if I recall correctly) and a little help from one of our friends (whose name will remain anonymous here). Since ignoring trolls no longer works, it appears push-back has become the preferred option.

    And push-back is what I employed to rid ourselves of the Double-D from Long Beach California who harassed members of this community and harassed me on Christmas Day some years ago. With respect to death threats, it was not Double-D but his followers who threatened me - hence the email to Double-D's employer. I should note in retrospect, a former member of this community (the one who called himself "Repsac") still makes a blogging career out of messing with the mad menace - no doubt a form of obsessive-compulsive behavior. Good riddance to both of them!

    Trolling is a phenomenon not merely limited to Cyberspace. Outrageous remarks by extremely partisan politicians, for example, can be regarded as a form of trolling. Donald Trump is a troll, as are Louis Gohmert, Steve King, Michelle Bachmann, and Sarah Palin, as examples.

    Street demonstrators who harass Planned Parenthood clinics are trolls. How to counteract them? Post their mug shots on the Internet; they disappear like cockroaches under a bright light.

    It is said that all bullies are cowards. Once you expose them, they retreat. Push-back, get in their faces, report them to law enforcement. A zero tolerance for trolls is what it takes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Back when I had energy, I had less tolerance and I think it's still good policy to confront and expose. As you say, mildew and cockroaches thrive in the dark and isn't it the cars with the blacked out windows who try to push people around?

      But you can't win them all or educate them all or cure their illnesses and in the case of the Nutty Professor maybe it's best to save the rhetoric and hope for the occasion to meet in a dark ally (did I really just say that?) I can't advocate violence, at least not publicly and I try to remember that he, like the good the bad and the ugly will soon enough be gone and forgotten. Still, as long as we have anonymity, as long as roaches can find strength in numbers, we'll always have trolls.

      Anonymity sure as hell doesn't bring out the best in these little, inconsequential p*icks pretending to importance - and that's what they are. I don't even think most of them have any real commitment to the crap they spew, they just do it the way kids write fuck you on walls - just to get noticed, to have something they can feel they belong to, like the Klan or the Tea Party to get back at a world that ignores and rejects them, because they know they're inferior, because they're cowards.

      Delete
  3. Thank you (O)CT(O)PUS for the call and the warning, I appreciate having wonderful blogging friends out there.

    Let me explain.

    I had to put my blog on comment moderation last summer because of harassing comments from several conservatives from other blogs. Even when I think they've tired of sending me sexually explicit comments (and links to pornographic photos, usually of women's genitalia or Michelle Obama as an ape)and I remove the filter, their comments return, with a vengeance.

    This happened to me in the past with another rightwing blogger in Texas who used his blog to post sexually explicit photos and place my name beneath them.

    As far as I can determine, the people harassing me and my blog in the past and in the present are males.

    For reasons only a psychologist can explain to me, liberal women with strong opinions threaten their manhood, so they need to take it upon themselves to humiliate and degrade us.

    One conservative blogger even hosted a "Hate Week" so that his followers could insult and degrade me without fear of being deleted. It was a huge success, and many of his followers want another "I Hate Shaw Week" to show off their stupidity.

    A blogging friend alerted me to the fact that commenters on the right have dubbed me "The Wicked Witch of the Blogsphere." I decided to own it.

    I temporarily changed my banner photo at P.E. and my avatar to reflect my new Wiccan identity.

    I've said in the past that I'm a great admirer of Mel Brooks and his humor. Our family often quotes him when we need a laugh to keep from crying. Brooks was once asked why he always had Nazis in his films, and--to paraphrase--he answered that mocking is the best revenge. His mockery of Hitler, the Nazis, and all who seek to destroy and degrade people was, I thought, the way to handle bullies and idiots.

    So that is the reason I temporarily changed my banner photo, but I think I'll continue to own my witch signature.

    It is interesting that these base characters on the right find it necessary to go after me with sexual insults. I've been called a "whore," a "slut," a person who "likes to take it up the ass from black men," and other endearing terms.

    The reason for their outrage? I'm a liberal woman, and I run a liberal blog.

    Their intelligence is so compromised that they haven't yet figured out that if my blog offends them, they do have the choice of not visiting it.

    But, unfortunately, that thinking is too complex for their little rodentian minds.

    Again thank you, (O)CT(O) for your call and concern.

    "They think they can step on us and make us go away. They can't if we don't let them."


    ReplyDelete
  4. Happy Halloween Shaw,

    Man! I was haired. I thought somebody had figured out how to nab passwords on teh googol and was wreaking havoc on your dashboard.

    Never a good idea to celebrate hatred. We just saw Green Eagle's post. I have been guilty. It was actually one of my right wing troll friends who pointed it out to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've been guilty too - big time. We're only human.

      Delete
  5. We have had so many problems in the past with trolls and I know some at the beach prefer to toy with them a while before devouring but I am still of a mind that the best course is to never let their posts see the light of day when possible and remove them as quickly as possible when comment moderation is not on. It is just too taxing to continually spar with these idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think there is something wrong with someone who kills themselves just because they read vulgarity aimed at them. "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me." Buck up, it's a nasty world out there and you cannot "lose it" because someone was verbally mean to you.
    If you call someone (or a group) racists, idiotic, hate filled, is it a surprise they (in kind) return the slurs? There is usually a perceived insult for these guys to go off. Verbal extremism is the cause of most of this garbage. If I call a "birther" a racist (and I have many times) I'm never surprised that they come back with vulgar attacks. I could have pointed out their mistake without the name calling. Should I call someone stupid, or an ass because I find their idea repugnant? If I do should I be surprised they come back and call me vulgar names? There is lots of anger out there and easy to get ones (even usually peaceful people) anger going.
    Chase them if you want, respond in kind, or get stubborn to the point of not giving up, but then it becomes a challenge of who can be more insulting. Then they will never give up. Bullying and criminal threats are two different monsters, but don't expect people to be nice to you, if you are not nice to them. It takes two to tangle, and most of the flaming I've seen, was not a one sided affair.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thee may be "something wrong" with anyone who kills himself, but that doesn't justify actions that, be honest, exceed what you might legitimately call "sticks and stones."

    The most usual victim is an adolescent and adolescents tend to be very insecure and very dependent on the approval of peers for their own self respect. Add to that the vulnerability of those who perceive themselves to be social outsiders and who in fact may be different for one reason or another and we get little girls hanging themselves because of their looks or for some other equally ridiculous (to an adult) thing.

    Saying "buck up" which seems likely to be another way of saying "be more like me" has a kind of smug and solipsistic feel to it. We all differ in our levels of need and levels of sensitivity and really, isn't there something wrong with those who need to cover up their own fears by persecuting others -- and perhaps even with those who feel the need to elevate themselves by sneering at the vulnerable? Who is worse, who is more pathological -- the gay teen, the overweight little girl who can't take it any more or the person who deliberately makes their lives even more miserable for sport?

    But you have a very valid point about responding in kind to the nasty and mean-spirited and vulgar name calling that pervades politics and public discussion. Most of the time, I think, there's no need for it, tempting as it is when talking about people like 'reverent' Phelps or the Klan or the Aryan Nation but no, the kind of garbage that gets thrown at some political figures and their supporters seems to be worst when least deserved. Worst and most inventive and most dishonest. Opposition to criticism seems highest when the supporters are more to what we call the "right" for some odd reason today. So forgive me for immediately suspecting the people who say "both sides do it" for having a strong bias themselves or a strong desire to forgive one side and condemn the other even though it's true: both sides do it and both feel justified.

    But I'm not accusing you of partisan motives. Your criticism is valid. I just think that when it comes to certain people and circumstances, it's too much to ask people to lay off or give the benefit of the doubt to indisputably evil people and organizations. I won't apologize for assuming malice on the part of a skinhead with swastikas tattooed all over his face. Sorry.

    I think you're right in pinning the tale on extremism and no matter who is the worst and nastiest, it's neither good or advantageous to an argument to let it lapse into an obscenity fest. Sometimes it ain't easy though. We live in extremist times in everything from sports to politics.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous,

    I don't know if your comment was directed at me or to someone in general; but if you were referring to me, I'll respond to this:

    "If you call someone (or a group) racists, idiotic, hate filled, is it a surprise they (in kind) return the slurs?"

    When I criticize the conservatives, I try to qualify the criticism by writing "some conservatives."

    What has happened on a few of the rightwing blogs is that a number of commenters (or more likely one or two) come to my blog, read it, then misrepresent and lie about what I've written and then personally attack me.

    My criticisms on my blog are always directed at politicians, pundits, and public personalities, not the individuals who harass me. In that, I am no different from any other blogger who goes after politicians, other public personalities, and political groups (inculding rightwing bloggers).

    Read The Swash Zone for example, and the excellent Capt. Fogg, who does an exceptional job of exposing GOP hypocrisy. His writing skills far exceed anything I can produce, and he spares no one and no group in his rhetoric. It's a beautiful thing to read. However, I've never read anything on the rightwing blogs attacking him, for example, for his very outspoken opinions.

    Why do you suppose I'm attacked and others who express their strong opinions are not?

    Your comment would have been more helpful if you had linked to instances on my blog posts where I've "flamed" an individual commenter. I readily admit to "flaming" the GOP, the TeaPublicans, and various politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This sentence:

    "In that, I am no different from any other blogger who goes after politicians, other public personalities, and political groups (inculding rightwing bloggers)."

    was poorly written. This is what I meant:

    In that, I am no different from any other blogger (including rightwing bloggers) who goes after politicians, other public personalities, and political groups.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No Shaw, I was speaking in generalities. I don't know what's going on with attacks against you, except for what you wrote here.
      I was physically bullied in school. My Dad said stand up for yourself, you will be surprised how quickly they will back down, and no one else will try and bully you. That's when Dad gave me the fundamentals of defending myself.
      The kid did not back back down, but I won the bloody fight and he, nor anyone else tried to bully me again (Capt. scent of blood theory). That was long ago in a "Leave It To Beaver" world.
      But I have my misgivings about going "tit for tat" with these jerks. These anger driven guys might get worse if challenged, and it's adding anger to your everyday life, to constantly do battle with them. As the saying goes, don't give them the power over you. Don't let them get inside your head.
      Like Capt. said, a lot of this goes beyond "sticks and stones" but everyone has to learn there are jerks in the world, and don't let your anger towards them, turn you into one of them. It's street thinking that says, dis me and I'll get you. I used the word perceived because there is no real reason (I doubt you gave them any reason) for them to act like jerks.
      I believe 98% of them will disappear. Of course Capt. is right, hard cores can be dangerous. You never know if your justified response might trigger one of those.
      My mind says ignore them, but I'm just the kind of guy to say, enough is enough. Be careful out there. I think women are targets because some men see them as more vulnerable emotionally and physically, true, or not.
      Like I said, there is a big difference between bullying and serious criminal behavior. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think some bullies grow up to be serious criminals. Although, I don't put a Klan member in the same light as some jerk kid who goes online and spreads false, vulgar rumors about another student, but he's the type to grow up and be a Klan member.
      As far as politicians and other public figures, they are open game for criticism, especially when they say and do the creepy, vulgar stuff they engage in. Even Jefferson falsely accused Adams of paying to keep a whore. That was a big scandal at the time, but then that time approved of slavery, so it's all relevant. The Republicans knew the public would be outraged at Clinton getting a BJ in the White House. Of course that pales in comparison to the Republican lie that led to an invasion of a country and thousands dead.
      I post anon because I don't have a blog and it seems silly to invent some alter ego fake ID.

      Delete
    2. Anon;

      I guess I was right in giving you the benefit of the doubt as to whether this was another troll attack. A lesson to me.

      Delete
  10. Shaw,

    "Why do you suppose I'm attacked and others who express their strong opinions are not?"

    If what we're talking about is bullying, I think it's the perception of weakness that is like the scent of blood to predators. In the mind of the right, such as it is, being liberal is being weak and their view of what it is to be conservative has much to do with aggression and selfish unconcern for others and their well being. Any professed liberal seems an easy target for them and if you're not, it will still take them ages to understand that they've been outclassed, if they ever do at all. An intelligent argument requires intelligence to understand after all.

    A weak mind will use anger and aggression and vulgarity to hide it. A weak mind needs support and so they form parties, they gang up. A weak mind lives in fear of being exposed and that's where the basic cowardice of bullies comes in. If you've ever had experience with the bully boys you'll agree that they almost always justify their actions by claiming the victim started it and deserves no sympathy and has no sense of humor, even if said victim is dangling from a lamp post.

    Not that smart people don't get angry and lord knows, I've shot myself in the foot by letting anger and also the sheer fun of kicking idiots around go unfettered.

    I don't know if the above was addressed at you either. Anony-mice all sound alike after all, but as to the anger of the bellicose right, the Limbaugh lovers, the Palin people, the gay bashers, the Jew haters, the immigrant haters and the racists, it's a bit much to blame the way we address those bogeymen on our own bad manners. The Klan isn't nasty because we insulted them, they're nasty because they're pathetic losers and cowards who use hate to hide their loserhood behind. The Tea Party isn't extremist because economists and historians insult them and that's why they have to pretend that it's wrong to call them ignorant and deluded and dishonest because we're just as bad.

    And thanks by the way, for the compliment. I have had my share of psychotic right wing opponents however. I've had death threats in fact both on line and in the mail. and as to someone lying and misrepresenting statements we make, I have to recall my statement that "heads should roll at Newscorp" being re-phrased as a death threat -- a call for the decapitation of Rush Limbaugh and a fine example of how "liberals" need human sacrifice for their obscene rites on one blog that shall remain a place that lives in infamy. Do I get to call him a batshit pseudoconservative moron? Can I get an amen? Does my answer justify his pathological aggression?

    I'm not nearly immune, but maybe the key is to use long words and sentences that take them so long to read they forget what it was all about and lose interest.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Or just disable anonymous commenting. Viola, trolls shrivel up and die. Figuratively speaking of course.

    Solved my issue with liberal/conservative trolls.

    ReplyDelete

We welcome civil discourse from all people but express no obligation to allow contributors and readers to be trolled. Any comment that sinks to the level of bigotry, defamation, personal insults, off-topic rants, and profanity will be deleted without notice.