I Think This Should Be Obvious

If you announce on Twitter that you are coming over to my site to troll my comments, you should not be surprised at the rapidity with which your comments are deleted.

If, after I delete the comments of an admitted troll such as the one noted above, if you come along and ask me why I delete comments rather than engage them, you’re no less of a troll than the first one, and I will delete your comments.

Also, I will be sad for you that this is your life.

111 Comments on “I Think This Should Be Obvious”

  1. In the interests of not being unhappy about my choice of species, I will pretend this is a hypothetical scenario.

  2. When dealing with people on the ‘net, I always try to keep these two facts in mind:

    * 50% of the population of America has below-average intelligence.

    * 80% of the population of America has regular access to the Internet.

  3. *blink* It’s been a whole week or so since anything even vaguely political has been posted here. Are people trolling Big Idea threads now? Wow. That’s sad desperation. There used to be a better class of troll. Sad how standards have slipped.

  4. Trolls are like lab rats in an experiment to prove the hypothesis “If you have to remind people you’re the smartest guy in the room, you’re not the smartest guy in the room.”

  5. I know it is wrong of me that I really want to know who these two yutzen were, but I kinda do.

    Not that I expect Our Gracious Host to enlighten me; I’m just admitting to a character flaw because we’re all friends here and it humanizes me or something like that.

  6. If they were really smart, they’d tweet something about how they’re coming over here to troll, but then come over and post thoughtful, relevant, and insightful comments.

  7. You need to get an intern to monitor your forums so you have more time to write. I would have a hard time staying focused if I had to constantly monitor forums.

  8. “If they were really smart, they’d tweet something about how they’re coming over here to troll, but then come over and post thoughtful, relevant, and insightful comments.”

    See! I am such an awesome troll they didnt even catch me!!
    Alas, this leads to troll scoring, live we have over on fark.

  9. Along the same lines of what @guess said above, and understanding it would take too much effort on your part for too little reward, I do think it’d be entertaining to have a tumblr where you could archive the most jaw-dropping troll comments for people to point and laugh at.

  10. Posting something stupid is not trolling. It’s just being stupid. Posting something for the purpose of getting a reaction is trolling. It doesn’t have to be inflammatory.

    This statement might be trolling.

  11. Someone recently said Steve Jobs and Bill Gates would eventually pay for making computers easy for stupid people to use and get on the internet.

  12. I’m going to at the very least hope that Troll 2 was a sockpuppet and that it’s really only one person with a sad, sad life, and not a tandem pair.

  13. “When dealing with people on the ‘net, I always try to keep these two facts in mind:
    * 50% of the population of America has below-average intelligence.
    * 80% of the population of America has regular access to the Internet.”

    – figures from the internet no doubt….

  14. I was going to show my neophyte stripes by asking for a definition of “troll.” I realize I still showed my stripes, but I’m Ok with that. Thanks for the definition.

  15. I followed the link to trolls’ website. I must not be in charge of higher cognitive functions yet. For the sake of all that is holy, save yourselves and don’t. go. there.

    Off to find the brain bleach.

  16. “I know it is wrong of me that I really want to know who these two yutzen were, but I kinda do.”

    If you really want to know, there were still URLs on the names of the recently malleted commenters. I confirmed my suspicions that they were from the corner of the Net I expected, and then felt like washing my hands.

  17. The thing that gets me about this is that they come here specifically to troll like you’re some kind of mythical creature and they’re the hero, ignoring your reputation and the bones around your website of past trolls like they’re all “THIS TIME WILL BE DIFFERENT!”

  18. Yeah, trolling me now appears to be a rite of passage for a particular brand of callow asshole. “Oh, you’ve trolled Scalzi. Now you can be in our racist sexist homophobic dipshit club.”

  19. ‘Yeah, trolling me now appears to be a rite of passage for a particular brand of callow asshole. “Oh, you’ve trolled Scalzi. Now you can be in our racist sexist homophobic dipshit club.”’

    I just laughed out loud in my cubicle and now my co-workers are giving me strange looks.

  20. I kinda feel sorry for the one guy whose current blog post is about how he thinks kids should get beaten more for acting up, and how his dad smacked him around whenever he got lippy or disrespectful (to the point where all his dad had to do was look at him to make him cower in fear) and look how he turned out!
    Yeah… look how he turned out, indeed.

  21. Pardon for asking, but are these the kinds of trolls that trigger your, uh, charity of damocles routine?


  22. I followed the link to trolls’ website. I must not be in charge of higher cognitive functions yet. For the sake of all that is holy, save yourselves and don’t. go. there.

    Too late. I already did. The saddest part is the two of them giving each other virtual hand-jobs (in a totally manly testosterone filled way, of course) over how tough they are compared to Scalzi.

    Pass the brain bleach please.

  23. I sorta wish they’d tweet something about how they’re coming over here to troll, and then come here and post comments about rocks and hammers and bridges.

  24. And the saddest part is, they’re probably off patting each other on the back and telling themselves that they WON this round, because they were just too manlymanmanly for Scalzi to handle, so he just deleted their scathingly insightful words like the Gamma Rabbit he is.

  25. @Jelmore – read the one a couple of posts down when he calls women “notches”, get as many notches as he can, and then wants to totally dominate and control a woman, Any sympathy will swiftly depart.

    The 7th century called, it wants its misogyny back.

  26. Oops. Sorry Mr Scalzi, that probably goes over the “don’t discuss” line. I don’t want to stir up the trolls any more than they already are, maybe best to delete the above comment?

  27. Thank you for maintaining a troll free enviroment.
    Could you do something about the comments on Youtube? ;)

  28. @ Andrew Hackard

    I know it is wrong of me that I really want to know who these two yutzen were, but I kinda do.

    Just a pair of sexually frustrated boy men trying to masturbate in front of a larger audience to validate their everlasting circle jerk. If you want to meet more, just visit the nearest junior high. Seriously, oxygen-thieves are not worth the time of day.

  29. Oh boy, more reminders to specific people that this is YOUR sandbox, and that attempting to pee in it will result in being removed from the sandbox! I do enjoy it when the Mallet of Loving Correction is deployed, to be honest, and having been a moderator of a message board before, some people really do deserve to get knocked down a couple of pegs and reminded that this is not their sandbox.

    Granted, these clowns of the anus are certainly sitting back and telling themselves that they out-manly-man’ed you, but we and they know that’s not true. Pardon me whilst I roll my eyes so far that I can hear the optic nerves creak in protest. Having looked up the one troll, I can say with certainty that it doesn’t have a fulfilling life, if this is the way it acts towards people it encounters in real life. Almost enough to make me feel sorry for it, and then I remember what a clown of the anus it is.

  30. Could you do something about the comments on Youtube? ;)

    With all due respect to our gracious host, he’s not Hercules. And I don’t think even the real Hercules could clean all the shit out of that particular stable.

  31. [Deleted. Also, pro tip: Insults work better when grammatically correct – JS]

  32. I think cleaning up Youtube is a cross of the Hercules, the Aegean stables, and Sisyphus on a particularly steep hill. If aliens ever read the comments, the whole species is doomed.

  33. [Actually deleted, FOR REALS, because I don’t want reader confusion as to what posts have been deleted and which are someone going to a joke (amusing as it was) – JS]

  34. These trolls are jealous of your powers of writing and mocking, neither of which the trolls can do very well, not having opposable thumbs or the brains for witty banter.

  35. Yes, Mr. Scalzi, I believe you’re correct about the 12 year old thing. I teach in the public school system and this is definitely a troll cub.
    Make that a troll cub with suspect COGAT scores.

  36. If I remember rightly, the whole fundraiser idea was that a whole bunch of people have pledged money to good works every time this site gets trolled. Thus, by trolling this site, the troll in question was doing good! Indeed, what kind of monster wouldn’t troll this site, at least until the pledged donations have been exhausted? You’ve created a monster, Scalzi!

  37. Warren Terra, not quite, unless there was an addendum I missed. The pledge was about the RSHD mentioning Scalzi on the RSHD’s site.


    The idea as I understood it was not to try to stop the RSHD and his stooges from posting whatever they want on the RSHD’s site, not to encourage them in any way to bring their noxious effluvia here.

  38. I always knew that Troll’s existed but I never really understood how prevelant and persistant they really were…
    I guess I’m naive like that.

  39. Scalzi: I don’t want to say I used to attract a BETTER quality of assbag. I will say that standards at Assbag Academy do seem to be slipping.

    Look, Mom, I built a real rocket based on the macaroni prototype!


  40. I read the post, now I can’t stop giggling…… The comments are making it worse….

  41. I am just old enough to not understand the phenomenon of internet trolling. Did we, as a species, always have some undefined urge to anonymously throw the worst insults imaginable at each other and therefore needed to create the internet in order to express said urge? Or did our creation of the internet give rise to the Artificial Unintelligence of trollery as a horrible byproduct? Which came first, the internet or the troll?

  42. I think it’s a desire to be noticed.
    I’ve heard that a neglected child learns to appreciate a slap, because that’s attention.
    But probably a desire to make the puppets dance = Don’t feed the trolls.
    Internet trolls are, in my scheme of things, fun people who need affection from a
    big dog that has just been at Key Cat’s litter box and is so grateful that food guy
    provided a treat. -_- Slurp! Slurp! I Love You! Why are you hiding your face? My
    love is unconditional, I don’t care how you look! Slurp! Slurp!
    Internet trolls are fun from a distance.
    Patent trolls, not.
    Really, some fine people (FP) have been shaking down businesses for using scanners.

    Only saying the above because I /really/ wanted to use that licked in the face by a big
    happy dog story.

  43. The troll came before the internet.
    The troll wants a reaction, so do bratty kids, and describable older

    Which came first? The chicken or the egg? Well, duh, the egg.
    Critters laid eggs way before were chickens.

  44. @thomasmhewlett: I remember the king of intelligent snark Ian Shoales (a/k/a Merle Kessler) once noting that “Writing a letter to the editor isn’t difficult. All you need is anger, paper, and time to kill.”

    That was in the 80s. The ‘Net removed the requirement for paper, and our society has done a pretty good job of providing the other two.

  45. John:

    As someone who enjoys your site and your writing, but doesn’t always agree with you, perhaps I could express a differing opinion on this issue. Hopefully this will be received in the constructive spirit in which it is intended.

    I would agree that if someone is coming into your comments thread and simply insulting you, then it is perfectly reasonable to delete these remarks. Those people *are* trolls; and no blogger should have to tolerate that sort of conduct.

    However, I have noticed of late that you tend to dismiss all disagreement on certain subjects as “racist, sexist, homophobic.” Rather than say, “let a hundred flowers bloom” and “let’s have a spirited debate”, you seem to be enforcing an ideological party line in regard to certain issues on the Whatever. This is your choice, of course; but it is important to note that this was not always the case here.

    Five or ten years ago, your site was characterized by a lot more diversity of opinion. A same-sex marriage thread, for example, would have a 50-50 (or at least a 60-40) spread of pro/con. Now everyone here basically says the same thing. It is almost like the Daily Kos or the Advocate on this issue (to cite just one example).

    I’ve also noticed that your more hardcore leftwing ideologues seem to have driven out many of the conservatives and moderates who used to post here.

    I have felt unwelcome here myself. For example, the other day I politely raised a same-sex marriage issue that ran against the popular opinion in the comment thread. You ordered me off the thread, and one of your prominent gay commenters immediately thanked you. I acceded to your wishes, in deference to your authority here. However, I had the impression that you have reached the point where you are simply not open to discussing certain issues. I find this sad, having enjoyed the spirit of free inquiry that prevailed here in the past.

    It is your site, of course; and you may run it any way you choose. However, I think that the recent spate of “trolls” (and the ramblings of your main tormenter, whom I won’t name) might be a reaction to the ideological straightjacketing that has occurred here of late. (Even though their reactions are counterproductive and wrong.)

    In short, what ever happened to diversity at the Whatever?

  46. Todd,

    I think the idea that homophobic views in some way represent a “flower” that should be allowed to “bloom” in a comment thread on a blog whose owner has publicly expressed opposition to homophobia and support for LGBT equality is
    a) completely bonkers and
    b) probably central to your difficulty in understanding what happened to diversity at Whatever.

  47. Todd – I don’t suppose it occurred to you that five or ten years ago, fewer people were supportive of same-sex marriage in the overall population and over time more and more people have considered the issues (particularly as they’ve seen same-sex marriage happen in several states without civilization immediately collapsing) and changed their minds. So it doesn’t surprise me at all that this blog would reflect that shift in public opinion.

  48. Todd: I think you may be misunderstanding the direction of Mr. Scalzi’s ire when he makes references to the racist, homophobic dipshits. He’s not referring to any and all viewpoints other than his own on these issues. He is, however, referring to a specific subset of individuals holding those views, a simple reading of whose writings reveals that there’s just really no other way to describe their views.

    One should also point out that being open-minded and valuing diversity do not carry with them an obligation to entertain every single other viewpoint for all time, nor an obligation to never arrive at a decision as to where one chooses to draw their own line.

  49. Todd,
    I won’t presume to speak for Mr. Scalzi, but here’s my view.

    It was once reasonable, by the standards of the time, to debate legal equality among races, religions, and sexes/genders. That time has passed, and those are no longer open for discussion.The same is true for the rights of non-straight people. Basic legal equality – here, at least – is axiomatic in a way that purely political opinions are not, and ‘debate’ that denies that is considered beyond the pale.

  50. Todd:

    “However, I think that the recent spate of “trolls” (and the ramblings of your main tormenter, whom I won’t name) might be a reaction to the ideological straightjacketing that has occurred here of late.”

    Well, no. The trolling has very little to do with the comment moderation on the site, it has to do with one particular dipshit (“tormentor” is rather too grand a description for him; “exasperator” is a bit closer) deciding that making me a target for his particular brand of jackassery will play well with his play pals. The trolls are here because they are racist sexist homophobic dipshits egging each other on to be assholes on my site. The large majority of the deleted comments around here are from a bunch of substandard cretins who think calling me a “mangina” is the very height of wit.

    There is no point in time I would have let that short of shit stand on the site, so attempting to suggest that my Malleting of their leavings represents a lessening of diversity is a bit much, I’m afraid. A festering pile of rancid shit is not going to result in the bloom of thought; it’s just going to be a big pile of shit in the middle of a comment thread. I’m not going to let people shit in my comment threads.

    “For example, the other day I politely raised a same-sex marriage issue that ran against the popular opinion in the comment thread.”

    Well, what you did was offer a highly-charged question aside from actual topic in the thread, based on — to put it entirely charitably — deeply flawed logic. As I said at the time, you didn’t seem to understand just how offensive and ignorant you were coming across (it seems you still don’t), and there was nothing good that was going to come out of the discussion of those points, either for you or for the thread.

    I am aware you appear to believe you were offering nothing more than a valuable counter-point to the discussion. But in my opinion, you were wrong, and my opinion is the one that counts here. Likewise, I appreciate you presented your question politely, but there was enough wrong about your entire comment on the rhetorical level that your politeness, while appreciated, couldn’t compensate for every other problem there.

    The observation has been made earlier in the thread that ten years ago the discussion of certain topics (same-sex marriage in particular being one of them) was different because the landscape around the topic was different, and I agree with that. Moreover, I think it’s entirely legitimate not to have (as an example) the same “same-sex marriage 101” discussions here over and over again; it’s tedious and after a while — and particularly if it’s the same people raising the same objections which has been chewed over and refuted time and again — it becomes disingenuous.

  51. I’ve been trying to find the thread they trolled today. I want to go gloat over the bones of their comments. But I can’t find it. What thread was it?

  52. I missed it too, but looks like it was in the last Big Idea thread. Which is particularly obnoxious seeing as those threads are explicitly NOT Scalzi.

  53. *reads Todd’s comment, shakes head*

    *reads Scalzi’s comment to Todd, realizes what the problem is*

    I find it interesting when anus clowns try to sound so intellectual, and try to make it seem like they’re not REALLY insulting you by oh-so-innocently questioning everything that has been said on your site, and the policies you employ.

    Kids, the bottom line is this: This is John Scalzi’s sandbox, and he generously allows us to play in it. If we choose to play nicely, and possibly engage in some heated discussion, this is fine, as long as we employ adult methods of conflict resolution. If we choose to shit in the sandbox, and then fling the shit around, and attempt to smear it on other commenters, Scalzi is well within his rights to either kitten our postings, delete them altogether, or deploy the tactical nuke of the Hammer of Bannination.

    This model of discussion is the same across virtually all the internet, with the exception of a few places where engaging in under-bridge behavior is not only tolerated, but sometimes egged on into becoming abusive behavior. Unless it’s YOUR name on the blog/message board/website, it’s not your sandbox, and you don’t get to make the rules or set the tone.

    Agreement with every single view that Scalzi, or anyone else, holds is not a requirement. Civility, and not acting like a complete dickbag, IS a requirement. I tend to lurk here without posting often, but even I understand this not-very-difficult concept. And really, most of us LIKE reading comments that trend towards lively debate of whatever issue is at hand, and do NOT like reading comments that consist of “hur hur hur, you suck, FIRST,” and other commentary that seem to be standard amongst a certain set of under-bridge dwellers. Sometimes, it makes me wonder if they are not issued a handbook upon enlistment in the Royal Douchefleet.

  54. Also, Todd, keep in mind that the person in question explicit said “I’m going to go troll John Scalzi’s site now.” He did not say “I am going to go and try engage commenters in conversation.”

  55. Todd: I politely raised a same-sex marriage issue

    Issue? What???


    When I think of San Francisco in the late 1970s,

    You might as well have posted a comment that said: I am completely ignorant of the GLBT community, but that doesn’t stop me from having serious and significant issues with gay marriage informed by a stereotype from 35 years ago.

    You’re relating to gays as little more than cartoon caricatures rather than real life human beings. And then you call it “ideological straightjacketing” because no one had the patience to educate you.

  56. (ugh, lovely guys, both of them, hard to choose between the chap with neanderthal (superiority) fixation and the abused one who don’t even realise he was abused and wants to promulgate the abuse down the line)

  57. Looks like the one with the neanderthal fixation has quite the crush on you, John. It would be cute if… um, no. There’s no way it’s cute. Thanks for keeping the sandbox here clean.

  58. The saddest part is the two of them giving each other virtual hand-jobs (in a totally manly testosterone filled way, of course) over how tough they are compared to Scalzi.

    I used to study kung fu with a student of Bruce Lee’s, who could kick the ass of people half his age even after he injured his hip (requiring him to walk with a cane for the rest of his life) AND had cancer.

    Would-be tough guys have a high standard to beat and I’m afraid high-fiving each other over trolling on the Internet just ain’t gonna cut it.

  59. @welltemperedwriter: there are no tough people, there’s only the individual pain threshold.

  60. @welltemperedwriter: And under-bridge dwellers who high-five each other over the standard Royal Douchefleet comments that come straight from the handbook, not only are they not tough guys, probably the term “jackwagon” could apply here. Along with various others. Certainly, it can be said that when your insults don’t even bother with creativity, you’re not worth reading at all.

  61. Katyisbutthurt, I don’t really think you’re being fair. Todd asked a question in good faith; he got an answer. I wasn’t following Whatever in 2007, so I have no idea if things were ever different, but this community does lean strongly to the left. Not as much as a some other blogs, but still.

    Which is obviously fine- personal blogs are never going to be unbiased nor should they be. But I don’t think that means conservatives are shitting on the carpet. They just need to be aware that they’re in the minority view, and act accordingly. That’s what Scorpius does.

  62. @MRAL: Right. Because the disingenuous butthurt over being told that he’s been expressing opinions that rest their weight on flawed logic is a straightjacketing of ideology. Sure it is. Playing innocent, laying down a highly charged and extremely flawed opinion that includes some serious stereotyping and other forms of nastiness, and acting surprised when being called out for taking a shit in a comment thread – these are all things that have been righteously called out. If Todd wants to express Todd’s opinions, no matter how ill-advised or based on flawed logic they are, in a forum where he will get unquestioning support? Then Todd needs to find a message board or a blog filled with people who share the same views, or found his own. Coming into a blog where people have differing views from yours, taking a shit in a comment thread, and acting surprised and butthurt when called on it is bad form, no matter what side of the ideological argument you are coming from. Coming in, disagreeing with opinion respectfully, and not acting like you are so SURPRISED! And HURT! And everyone is BEING SO MEAN TO ME!, that is a different story altogether, and one that other people employ here in the comments with regularity. Why it seems to be so difficult for others to engage in this way is beyond me, but hey, those of us who have been to the rodeo before, and have seen this kind of skating riiiiiight up to the line, and then dropping a turd in the punchbowl, well, we’re just being unfair.

  63. MRAL, first of all, what’s MRAL stand for? I googled the acronym dictionary. Murfreesboro Rutherford Art League was the first hit. Some obscure movie reference?

    Second: Todd asked a question in good faith;

    The entire premise for his question rested on a old, outdated stereotype of gay men.

    Third: act accordingly. That’s what Scorpius does.

    heh heh.

  64. >anonydouce says: [at JS I assume]
    >Don’t you have anything better to do than delete comments?

    Yes, he does.
    So please fuck off so that he can get back to redoing Azimov’s
    Foundation “trilogy,” which he would make less dry.

    Damn, not “Shottle Bop.”
    A short story. The aliens gave the humans tech. The humans
    were near near Jupiter playing with the new tech, and dude
    was out duck hunting and talking with one of them.
    Dude didn’t shoot a sitting duck, explained why, his friend said:
    [Oh, I just knew you guys where awesome.] Neither do we!
    Well, gotta go, we’re about to meet your fleet at Jupiter!

  65. MRAL: I think it’s possible for Todd to have asked that question, honestly and sincerely, with a genuine interest in exploring that avenue of discussion. The problem is that that particular avenue of discussion is nested in awful stereotypes and bigotry, which is why it got the shut down.

    Good faith does not obligate others to act in any particular way. If Todd didn’t know better regarding that topic, good faith doesn’t mandate the task of taking the time to work him through the paces of revelatory uplifting to anyone other than himself. He’s a perfectly capable reader. And he should know that now, if he believes that this is a forum for honest exchange. This is assuming that to him that a good faith forum means anything other than a place where he gets to say his part and make people respond to his degrading rhetoric.

    And clueless bigotry is still bigotry. And it does damage all the same. And getting the most polite shut down for some of the nastiness rhetoric I’ve seen honestly expressed on Whatever in some time and THEN coming back to argue that this is why this place is turning into an echo chamber reflects very little graciousness or reflection on his part.

  66. Are we talking about Todd’s 70’s-gays comment again? Clarification: John, is this the conversation you asked us not to continue?

    If not, I have things to say about it. If so…wtf are the rest of you doing?

  67. Xopher, technically this is about Todd coming into this the thread last night to whine about how mean John is to “conservatives” such as himself and how John should allow – and I quote – “spirited debate” about whatever fool thing crosses Todd’s mind.

    MRAL: you’re kidding about, Scorp, right? Cause that dude’s raised thread-shitting to an art form. A stinky, stinky art form.

  68. Weird. My comment isn’t showing up, but when I try to repost it, I get a “duplicate comment” message. Sigh.

  69. Xopher, your comments ended up in the spam queue for reasons passing understanding; there’s no keyword in them that should trigger that response. I’m looking into it.

  70. One of mine disappeared completely, so it’s not just a weird techno grudge with Xopher…

  71. Well, that one survived so I will try a shorter version of my original.

    The argument which Todd is advancing is that people poop on John’s parquet because they are provoked by John’s rule against people pooping on his parquet; the logical corollary is that if John allows people to poop on his parquet then they won’t poop on his parquet because the only reason they were pooping on his parquet is because John would not let them.

    This is self evidently fatuous, and I therefore call bullshit…

  72. @MRAL, there are thoughtful conservatives who post here. There are not-so-thoughtful liberals who behave badly here, and get Malleted. Certainly the site skews left, but it skews far more intellectual; by which I mean invented facts, fallacious arguments and concern trolling have a very short half-life. This means that the sort of person whose discussion skills don’t go beyond the level of being the political enfant terrible in their D&D group, or who is used to having certain shaky premises unquestioned, is not going to fare very well coming here and trying to play wake-the-sheeple. When that person gets their rhetorical ass handed to them with an adorable garnish, it’s so much easier on the ego to decide that they are being unfairly persecuted for their beliefs, rather than considering that maybe they were showing their ass and need to up their braining skills a few notches.

    Todd’s most recent comment was a tiresome attempt at jujitsu that isn’t particularly original. As far as I can tell, the thought process goes like this: liberals like diversity, right, and we all know that ‘diversity’ really means letting in anybody regardless of whether they’re qualified or have anything to say, so if some liberal isn’t not allowing anyone to come crap on the floor, clearly they are being bigoted against floor-crappers and are insufficiently diverse, CHECKMATE! I mean, really.

    As for Whatever, while the discussion around same-sex marriage may have been different given that the legal and social surroundings were different, I really can’t remember a time when dumb bigotry and concern trolling were embraced with open arms as part of the refreshing rough-and-tumble of meaningful discourse.

  73. “Damn, not “Shottle Bop.”
    A short story. The aliens gave the humans tech. The humans
    were near near Jupiter playing with the new tech, and dude
    was out duck hunting and talking with one of them.
    Dude didn’t shoot a sitting duck, explained why, his friend said:
    [Oh, I just knew you guys where awesome.] Neither do we!
    Well, gotta go, we’re about to meet your fleet at Jupiter!”

    “Punch” by Fred Pohl

  74. anonydouce: I’m sorry, that should be “…So they should please…” and not “…so please….”
    My problem with proof reading is the normal one–I know what I meant to say so and read
    what I actually said as what I meant to say.*
    I apologize for swearing at you.

    *Writers need editors who have no idea what the writer meant to say and are reading what
    person _did_ write.

    I wrote thank you to Andrew, which isn’t here yet, so:
    I’ve also noticed that whenever a major DDOS attack is going on the whole internet gets
    messed up in little to big ways.
    To make things worse for me I’m on ATT which is helping make things worse by them not
    bothering to secure their network.
    Ctrl F the article for DNS ” amplification attacks .”

  75. I tried to post on this topic the other day and got a feedback link that said:


    I was on an unfamiliar computer which was linked to the internet via a unfamiliar network, which is probably where things went awry.

    But I have decided to take that message as A Sign and not comment on this thread about trolls, which is hardly an edifying subject, after all.

  76. @jelmore49 Sometimes the victim is not aware that they were abused. I believed that I was treated just like all the other kids. I had no examples because everyone was on their best behavior when company visited. I have always been uncomfortable around small children because they are so uncontrolled. When I was 2 my father could put me on a chair and I would stay there for as long as he wanted, wiggle a bit, but STAY. When a gentle lady at church asked my parents why I did not smile, their solution was to order me to smile at church or I would get a spanking when I got home. Since I was kept away from other children, I had no clue this was unusual. Although I did not take up trolling, I had other bizarre behaviors that separated me from most of humanity. Most of them were defenses against an attack that I was always anticipating; thats how I grew up – random attacks for unknown reasons. Obviously years of therapy have made me more self aware and lessened some of the damage.

    Not to justify trolling, I am very grateful that our host spends time making this blog a troll free place to read. However, the person justifying abusive behavior is probably only justifying how he was raised. Facing that one’s parents were not only flawed but abusive is difficult, painful. Mental health support is not easily available or socially approved. Not eveyone is willing to admit a problem or do the work to address it.

  77. I think we should all thank Scalzi for not bequeathing the Mallet to yogurt. There ain’t nothing so bellicose as lactose.

  78. Vis licked by a big dog.
    The dog should also say: “Wow, each slurp makes you smell better!”

  79. Shawn T: you’re welcome. Some days the only sense of accomplishment I get is from identifying a story for someone…

  80. @Lucy Azul
    When I was two YO a horrrrrrrible punishment that Mommie did to me
    was was she’d make me sit in a corner and stare at the walls for twenty
    I think I’ve the age and how long wrong but yes.
    You are describing horrible horribleness, the standard way to get kids
    to believe forever that black people* have tails or that only n[] adore
    eating watermelon** or similar shitheadedness.
    I prefer the brainwashing that is all about sharing, and ‘how would you feel
    You, Lucy, are describing the standard way that a POS (not Point Of Sale)
    maintains control, creates the next generation of shitheads that are so f’d
    up that they believe anything they are told, and so do anything they are told
    to do.
    *Oh, she so gorgeous. But her skin was so dark and I didn’t know how to
    get a pic of her. The pics I took? I couldn’t see her. She blended into the
    shadows, I guess.
    **If it be that you encounter an idiot who doesn’t like watermelon, or thinks
    that a slice of watermelon needs salt on it please please, speak harshly to


  81. I left out:
    And Lucy? You are doing great =
    Your being at a website like this one means to me that you, well, like, know stuff,
    and that your being here will help you because Scalzi says things like “[It’s bad to
    do bad things.]”
    Bleah, like she’s still here.

%d bloggers like this: