[Etiquette] "Trolling" accusations -- enough already!

[Aleph Null]

[Mods: I know this isn't news or prep but it affects the whole board which is why I posted it here. Obviously you can move it if you feel it needs it, but I would like everyone to think about this issue.]

I have noticed that once again, the word "troll" is being thrown around here with wild abandon. Not a day goes by where I don't see someone call someone else a "troll", usually for no reason other than that person saying something the accuser doesn't like, or the "troll" taking a position that is different or unpopular. The straw that broke the camel's back for me today was seeing Senses On called a "troll" today just for daring to post a thread with a potentially unpopular view.

Here's a definition of the term...

The New Hacker's Dictionary:

troll v.,n.
1. [From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames; or, the post itself. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it. 2. An individual who chronically trolls in sense 1; regularly posts specious arguments, flames or personal attacks to a newsgroup, discussion list, or in email for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion. Trolls are recognizable by the fact that the have no real interest in learning about the topic at hand - they simply want to utter flame bait. Like the ugly creatures they are named after, they exhibit no redeeming characteristics, and as such, they are recognized as a lower form of life on the net, as in, "Oh, ignore him, he's just a troll."

The two important points of the definition are the type of material posted: "arguments, flames or personal attacks", and the intent of such material: "for no other purpose than to annoy someone or disrupt a discussion". Of course, determining intent is not always easy, but the intent matters.

Disagreeing with someone, taking an unpopular stance, or vigorously but unabusively defending a position are not trolling, if the person who does those things is being genuine and is following the rules. It is only trolling when the reaction to the post is the point, and not the substance of the post itself.

This is the problem here, IMO. If you want to accuse someone of trolling, there needs to be evidence that they are only seeking to be disruptive. This does NOT mean everyone who takes a contrary view or says something unusual or unpopular is a "troll".

IMO, the term is used far too often around here. There are certain individuals who have strong opinions that differ from the majority. The mere fact that they post articles or make comments defending those unpopular views does not make them "trolls". Something does not become "trolling" merely because some vocal people don't like it. They become a troll when they post material they don't really care about just to piss people off.

Finally, trolling is not allowed on this forum. If you think someone is legitimately trolling, then rather than whine about it in the thread, report the post to a mod.

This is all MHO of course. But I really hope people will STOP using this word all the time.

-A0-

 

[Dennis Olson]

Here's my personal opinion of WHY folks call others "trolls". IMHO, it's 'net shorthand for "jackass". Troll has come to be a less profane way of telling somewone they're fulla sh*t. Additionally, it lets the recipient know that the hurler of that particular epithet finds their material semi-worthless. All that conveyed in a single word.

JMHO, and worth exaclty what you paid fer it.

A0, you are SUCH a Troll....

 

[Dennis Olson]

Now, for a REAL flame (perhaps the best ever), ref the copy/paste below, originally posted by Sysman:

------------------

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, I'll bet you couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

You are a canker. A sore that won't go away. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, a weasel. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

You are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying your alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired you and then killed themselves in recognition of what they had done.

I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. And did I mention you smell?

Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it more rapidly.

You snail-skulled little rabbit. Would that a hawk pick you up, drive its beak into your brain, and upon finding it rancid set you loose to fly briefly before spattering the ocean rocks with the frothy pink shame of your ignoble blood. May you choke on the queasy, convulsing nausea of your own trite, foolish beliefs.

You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot.

And what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat, spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a disease, you puerile, one-handed, slack-jawed, drooling, meatslapper.

On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool. You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go.

You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted boggish foot-licking twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You gormless crook-pated tosser. You churlish boil-brained clotpole ponce. You cockered bum-bailey poofter. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill.

You are a fiend and a coward, and you have bad breath. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just for knowing you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go away.

I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid, so stupid it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know.

I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me. After this, you may not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant questions and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh.

The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped away most of your of what you wrote, because, well... it didn't really say anything. Your attempt at constructing a creative flame was pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a load of babbling was hardly effective...

Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things more difficult. If I had known, that this was your case then I would have never read your post. It just wouldn't have been "right". Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.

 

[CygnusXI]

Goblin!

 

[Meemur]

Take the longer view for a moment:

1) We have more new folks on board.

2) The anxiety is starting to leak in here, a tad, which is a sort of "heads up" for long time posters. There was a major brawl right before 9/11.

Suggestion: try to chill, and if you're starting to feel annoyed by what you're reading, go do something else.

 

[Aleph Null]

Originally posted by Dennis Olson:
Here's my personal opinion of WHY folks call others "trolls". IMHO, it's 'net shorthand for "jackass". Troll has come to be a less profane way of telling somewone they're fulla sh*t. Additionally, it lets the recipient know that the hurler of that particular epithet finds their material semi-worthless. All that conveyed in a single word.

Actually, I think if it is synonymous with another word it would not be "jackass" but rather "liar". The implication is that the person doesn't really mean what they say but only wants a reaction. That's how I usually see it used.

A0, you are SUCH a Troll....

Oh, you have NO idea how much fun I could have around here if I wanted to really start trolling!

-A0-

 

[fairbanksb]

Troll..... In the end, it's just a word.. OMG, what a flame......

 

[Lenore]

Ace flame.

 

[wrs]

That definition isn't properly inclusive

There are trolls who simply post their negative point of view on a thread that disagrees with the point of view expressed by the thread starter, irrespective of whether they care. For instance, Troke is in my view, an anti-gold troll. The latest post about the arguments for buying gold thread is a perfect example. Here was Trokes completely useless preface to his somewhat useful comment:

Ha AZ!! You have asked the deadly question. And you will not get a coherent answer.

In that he exposes his bias. He doesn't buy gold, he bought silver at the top quite a few years ago and seems embittered about that so he (it seems to me anyway) has made it his calling to denounce those who would suggest buying gold or silver these days. It hasn't been just since gold got over $400 that he has been saying these kinds of things but since gold was well below $300. So in my view, his contrary posts reflect no analysis and only personal opinion, i.e. purchasing gold is simply speculating which in fact it isn't.

In fact azygous being a newbie asked a perfectly common newbie question and got a number of good answers, all of them coherent I might add.

The fact that Troke put his biased comment on there makes him trolling in my opinoin, however, troll is a subjective judgement and I think your post is just inviting flames................

As another example, Flint is an establishment troll. He will always argue we need taxes, we need fiat money, we don't need religion, anything "unscientific" is mythology, and so on. Flint seems to have copious time to argue the IRS threads and the religion threads and less so on other matters but he loves extending those types of threads. Flint is a true troll and has been here forever..............

 

[Sooth]

Now, for a REAL flame (perhaps the best ever), ref the copy/paste below, originally posted by Sysman:
------------------
You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, I'll bet you couldn't pour piss out of a boot with instructions on the heel.<snip>

Belongs in the Flame Hall of Fame. Wonderful. Immediate hiring as a greeter at any Renaissance Festival before they had to get a little more PC. Dang!

Sooth

 

[Safecastle]

FYI, I would like to point out another definition of "troll" in at least localized common usage ...

U.P.ers (from the upper peninsula of Michigan) refer to those who are from lower Michigan as trolls, since they live under (south of) the Mackinac Bridge.

No offense intended to those of you under the bridge.

 

[ChainedLightning]

I think we have some people who've been around a while who qualify as "troll" on occasion. They've already spouted their opinions a zillion times, we all know how they feel about it, and yet they must continue with spouting it in ways that seem to be designed to try to create anger to the people they are addressing. That fits the definition of troll.. but those that have stayed around have either managed to do it in a way that keeps them under the "do something about it" bar, and/or they are a contributing member when it comes to other topics so it is allowed to slide. (or, that's the way I see it, anyway).

We have one new member that is most definately a troll, and I'm just waiting to see how long it takes for him (her?) to get booted.

CL

 

[Herbmountain]

OMG! I had to print that out for my daughter. What a howling hoot. I soiled my pants reading the Hall of fame flame. What a brilliant mind. Was this against someone we know?

 

[Dennis Olson]

No HM, it was actually posted on the 'net a coupla years ago as the "World's Greatest Flame". I have to agree....

 

[pkid]

Now, for a REAL flame (perhaps the best ever), ref the copy/paste below, originally posted by Sysman:

Credit for that one has to go to Guy Macon, who originally posted it to Usenet, at least as far back as 1996.

http://www.hopf.demon.co.uk/humour/flame.txt

 

[PentelPen]

Official version of the Ultimate Flame.

History of the Ultimate Flame.

 

[Amazed]

Trust me, Senses On does not need anyone to "protect" her from being called anything. She can and will, if provoked, shred her opponent into itty bitty pieces. She is a very articulate lady with high intelligence who can state her opinions and back them up.

You go a couple of rounds with Esso and you'll be licking wounds for days.

 

[ioujc]

Then again.....

there are some individuals who have sent me such awesomely hateful PMs, in response to what I considered a polite civil inquiry about some of their comments, that it is a true TEST of my humanity NOT to eviscerate them when they post some of their
drivel.....
One particular individual, which I will refrain from naming.....made some of the most cruel comments about my being a Christian that I have ever heard. He (oops! gave it away to some extent) implied that only HE had any knowledge about reality, yet his posts reflect one totally out of touch with anything other than Kool-Aid tripping. You probably can guess who I'm talking about....and yes, on occassion I have verbally attacked him, but usually only in relation to the opinions he was espousing.
Some people just DON'T HAVE A CLUE about how THEIR behavior brings certain responses from others....or maybe they just "get their rocks off" being hateful?????

 

[Aleph Null]

Originally posted by Amazed:
Trust me, Senses On does not need anyone to "protect" her from being called anything. She can and will, if provoked, shred her opponent into itty bitty pieces. She is a very articulate lady with high intelligence who can state her opinions and back them up.

You go a couple of rounds with Esso and you'll be licking wounds for days.

Actually, I've gone rounds with Senses On several times in the past, since we disagree on a great many subjects. I'd like to think I left her licking wounds at least as often as she left me so.

The point was not that she needed protecting, but rather that her being called a "troll" simply for posting a thread about Jessica Lynch shows the extent to which the word is overused.

-A0-

 

[Watchman63]

Aleph Null,

Thanks for the comprehensive definition of "Troll". I've been wondering about that.

I disagree with many of the things you post, but I have a lot of respect for the way you conduct yourself in your posts when you disagree with someone. I wish everyone here was able to respectfully and articulately state their reasons for disagreeing in the way that you do instead of just going on a rant.

 

[Bubba Zanetti]

I called her a troll (which is rather mild name calling) not because she posted a thread concerning Lynch, but because she said this (entire post - not edited):

After reading several of the threads here (beheading, prisoner abuse, Israels in the trucking industry, etc.), I can't help but remember the responses to the the "rescue" of Jessica Lynch, the Xena of the American Way, the heroic American Princess, the victim of rape and torture, blah blah blah.

In a later post on the same thread, she went on to say that she was making a statement about the media, but this post standing on its own seems only intended to inflame those who, perhaps blindly, support the troops.

(so much for making it until monday without posting).

 

[Dennis Olson]

ioujc, placing someone on IGNORE also stops PMs from them.

FYI....


EDIT: RC, "self-imposed exile"?? LMAO!!!! "The first fix is free, kid..."

 

[Bubba Zanetti]

OK... I'm returning to my corner.

No more posts until monday

 

[Amazed]

Actually, I've gone rounds with Senses On several times in the past, since we disagree on a great many subjects. I'd like to think I left her licking wounds at least as often as she left me so.

Touche.

 

[Aleph Null]

RockChucker, I should apologize to you because I really didn't mean to single you out. I shouldn't have mentioned the incident with Senses On as it was a symptom of the overall issue, nothing more. The self-imposed exile is unnecessary, really.

ChainedLightning: You make some good points.

Watchman: Thanks, I try, though I do sometimes forget myself when I am in a bad mood.

-A0-

 

[coalcracker]

Interesting how we look at the message board in different ways...

I see no value at all in winning arguments or in leaving one licking wounds. None whatsoever. On the other hand, if I can lead one to do one's own thinking and arrive at correct conclusions that is my goal. I'd also like to be as encouraging as possible to others along the way (as I remember the MANY stupid things I have done and said in life). Sometimes we all need a good rant, but even then I'd avoid calling someone names. Just my viewpoint.

 

[Troke]

For instance, Troke is in my view, an anti-gold troll.

I have stated many times that I am a 'stealth-troll'. I guess I have been outed.

BTW, I will get off gold when you guys stop claiming it is an excellent investment and will be even better as soon as it stops being manipulated by gnomes in the basement of JP Morgan.

Only a genuine gold bug could hold both those opinions at the same time and feel no contradiction.

My first troll for the day.

BTW, I have been a silver freak since age 12 about and each day I get out my ingots and stroke them. That's why I have them.

I have never told anybody they were a good investment, because they weren't.

My second troll for the day.

I shall now slink off and find a bridge to hide under. When I was a kid, trolls hid under bridges. Since the advent of large culverts, some of us have been homeless and have showed up on the Net.

 

[PentelPen]

Re: That definition isn't properly inclusive

As another example, Flint is an establishment troll. He will always argue we need taxes, we need fiat money, we don't need religion, anything "unscientific" is mythology, and so on.

This appears to be a good example of calling someone a "troll" simply because they don't share the same point of view as many of the people on this forum.

 

[Michigan Majik]

FYI, I would like to point out another definition of "troll" in at least localized common usage ...

U.P.ers (from the upper peninsula of Michigan) refer to those who are from lower Michigan as trolls, since they live under (south of) the Mackinac Bridge.

No offense intended to those of you under the bridge.

According to this definition, I am a troll...lol
Being new, I am censoring myself a bit, not wanting to appear "trollish".
It took me too long to get in here to screw it up.
Thanks for posting the flame, Dennis. It was hilarious.

 

[Trasael Adnepos]

"..To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames;"

Oh, then you must be referring to perverse, obnoxious attempts at "humor" carefuly crafted to offend decent folk who oppose those forever defending all manner of perversion like:

"Aleph Null
Male Lesbian Transvestite"

Tras
_____________
"Shoot low, sheriff, they're ridin' shetlands!"

 

[wrs]

PentelPen, you got a promotion

Now you are a Director, used to be you were just an agent I think........

While I allow Flint does hold contrary views from most, there are good reasons to assign him the troll designation. For instance, he will troll you for inserting anything he views religious into a discussion. As an example, if you try to use the Bible as an historic document, he will immediately accuse you of having a religious bias and begin bashing anything else you write as simply religious fanaticism. He also resorts to criticizing the sources of information as biased when his are just as biased if not more so. To me, Flint argues from the point of emotion rather than logic and his prose is interspersed with inferences designed to annoy the other person and get them off track. Many people will fall for that and go down a completely different path than the one the thread started on. All those characteristics that Flint exhibits are those of a troll and many and a perfectly good thread has been ruined by Flint's trolling it.

Troke,
Im not the one that posts Bill Murphy's stuff, I have analyzed gold from a number of different points of view on this forum, none of which involved BB naked shorting. By the way, Im not entirely averse to your trolling, it's entertaining sometimes because you really don't have a lot to say about gold other than gold is a ponzi scheme or FDR euchred the idea of people distrusting banks and "hoarding" their money, or no one but the rich people had gold when we were on a gold standard. I bet you voted for William Jennings Bryan........

 

[Troke]

I bet you voted for William Jennings Bryan........

Ha! My Grandfather did and you know the acorn never falls far from the tree (or whatever)

 

[Aleph Null]

Originally posted by Trasael Adnepos:
Oh, then you must be referring to perverse, obnoxious attempts at "humor" carefuly crafted to offend decent folk who oppose those forever defending all manner of perversion ...

"Decent folk"? You have nothing to worry about, then, hmm?

No, actually, I don't consider my title to be trolling. If I wanted to troll I would change it to

"Aleph Null
Trasael's Gay Lover"



-A0-

 

[John H]

Remember that with everything going wrong in the world right now, many people are uptight and some others are in denial ( yep, even on TB2k ). If you're not doing either, you probably don't understand the situation or you're taking your meds like you're supposed to.

Lets all try to take a few deep breaths or wait a minute or two before reacting.

John

 

[Charlie]

FYI, I would like to point out another definition of "troll" in at least localized common usage ...

U.P.ers (from the upper peninsula of Michigan) refer to those who are from lower Michigan as trolls, since they live under (south of) the Mackinac Bridge.

No offense intended to those of you under the bridge.

You betcha hey dere. I be onna dem pasty eatin, sauna taking yoopers............damn them trolls.

 

[Charlie]

We ARE still family right?

If TSHTF and Fartman, AintItFunny, WRS or any of the other leftie posters show up at my shelter.....they will be welcomed. It will be tuff playing cribbage or twister with em by candle light while eating MRE's without bringing up past posts....but we ARE family......right???????

 

[brihard]

If I bring Canadian military rations can I come too?

(They make MREs taste like rotting feces, from everyone I've talked to who's eaten both...)

 

[Flint]

wrs:

I don't mind if you decide my disagreement with your opinions makes me a troll, but I do mind when my opinions are so poorly represented. Since my intent isn't generally to disrupt discussions, but rather to break them out of the rather dull pattern of reciting catechisms while people chant Amen, I'll take this opportunity to correct some of your errors, which I'm sure aren't intentional.

<b>Flint is an establishment troll. He will always argue we need taxes</b>

False. My position has always been that up to 90% of our taxes are spent on programs not properly within the scope of government, and that these programs should be discontinued. I will argue, though, that what we as a people decide we wish government to perform on our behalf, we as a people should pay for with taxes, and NOT pay for with deficits.

<b>we need fiat money</b>

Mostly false. My position is that fiat money has advantages and disadvantages. Properly managed, it is superior to any other form of money. Improperly managed, it is a complete disaster. Politicians, being focused on the short term (getting re-elected) face an irresistable temption to manage fiat money very badly. Proper management must be politically independent, yet politically sensitive. Given our economic history since the Great Depression, I'd say our management procedures deserve at least a B+. Conversely, our economic history on the gold standard gets no better than a C-.

<b>we don't need religion</b>

True. Religion, in general, is simply a mental defect. Try to get over it.

<b>anything "unscientific" is mythology</b>

Largely false. It's important to recognize which statements about the objective universe are <i>in principle</i> incapable of being falsified. These statements are unscientific, but not necessarily mythology. They are <i>policy positions</i>, statements of preference or wishful thinking, not statements of fact.

<b>he will troll you for inserting anything he views religious into a discussion.</b>

This fails to accord with any reasonable definition of trolling. Religion properly belongs in religious discussions. It generally serves as a distraction in any other discussion. Imagine someone jumping into every discussion arguing to save the whales, whether or not the discussion concerns anything related. I'd agree this is trolling. Yet substitute Jesus for whales, and suddenly you can't see the problem!

<b>if you try to use the Bible as an historic document, he will immediately accuse you of having a religious bias and begin bashing anything else you write as simply religious fanaticism.</b>

False. The Bible shows every indication of being reasonably accurate as a historical document, and in my reading has been pretty well verified by archaeological findings. <i>The problem lies in distinguishing moral tales from historical material.</i> Tales of creation, of Noah's flood, of various miracles, are NOT historical material, they are stories intended to draw moral conclusions or beguile potential converts. Treating moral tales as history is a mistake and a distraction.

The remainder of your comments lack any substance, and simply reflect your unhappiness that someone might disagree with things you hold most dear to your heart. I can only observe that more careful reading, armed with a bit less <i>a priori</i> antagonism, might go a long way toward preventing the kind of errors I've had to help you with here.

 

[Senses On]

Now I know I fell down the rabbit hole. (No explanation needed to anyone here at least a year ago.) I was already suspicious of my surroundings when I posted to a few of the more active threads. My suspicions have been confirmed.

Actually, I've gone rounds with Senses On several times in the past, since we disagree on a great many subjects. I'd like to think I left her licking wounds at least as often as she left me so.

OK, AO, you've made an unsubstantiated claim. Now document it. I want dates, references, links and independent opinions. Your subjective opinion regarding "victories" is not rational and cannot be replicated by science.

-------
RockChucker,

Scroll slowly down to your last posted pic. My first impression was that the next cheeks I would see would be yours, in full moon position. LOL

Troke,

You will always be Troke the Troll. That was ordained some time in the foggy past in the above-ground world. And you will also always be Troke the Travelin' Troll who has studiously and dutifully reported in on the State of the Nation after each of your travels -- to the delight of us all.
---------
Now I must find my way out of this dark maze filled with strange creatures, different laws of nature and unexplainable phenomena. There must be a real world somewhere.


Edited to fix really sloppy writing.

 

[Trasael Adnepos]

Senses On, "..give `em the truth, and let them think it is hell." Ain't perspective wonderful?

No worries here, Null. Simply advocating decency as always, while pointing out how fatally phony it was of you to begin such a thread. It's no secret we define decency quite differently. Your mask might not be quite so transparent if you didn't wear it on your backside whenever you speak through it. Evil measured and courteous can be more dangerous to the uninitiate than evil unrestrained, for the latter is easily recognizable.

Speaking strictly generally, of course, in order to maintain decorum and the expectation of political correctness, I would have to sympathize with the afore mentioned aversion to psuedo-intellectual degenerates deliberately and habitually antagonizing those with whom they disagree, or hurling flaming diversions at whatever sufficiently agitates their personal demons in their attempts to derail their opponents.

But then we are choosing to joust with windmills on the internet...

:lol

Tras