Friday, June 22, 2007

Public Service Announcement

The Internet is largely public. If you post in a public place, and are linked and mocked in another place, then it perfectly within the rights of the linker to mock you.

Its not their right to harass you, threaten you, or send a slew of trolls to your own website, but if the matter consists solely of linking and mocking, its hardly "really low" or "messed up."

If you get linked to on When Fangirls Attack, and then linked on another blog and mocked, the linking and mocking is not "the lowest of the low." Yes, sending trolls is low. Yes, some insults are stupid. However, a lot of different opinions are linked on WFA and it is read by people from various sides of the political spectrum. Linking and mocking will occur.

Bear in mind that the vast majority of the blogosphere is people linking other people, often for mockery. And if you were linked and mocked for linking and mocking someone's interview or point of view, they're pretty much doing the same to you as you did to them and it makes you particularly annoying and silly to the neutral onlooker. That's the Blogosphere. Its the wild.

Defend yourself, by all means. Ignore them, by all means. Express your personal opinions about their parentage, by all means. If you get trolled, lock down you blog if you must. If you get threatened, Complain if their mocking specifically called for people to troll you. Argue back, retreat, whatever you must. But don't make generalizations about "Bloggers" (Especially if you are one, and if you have a livejournal, you are one too. Deal with it) and don't make bitter statements about them linking public posts.

I say this without naming names or linking what brought this about because I've seen more than enough complaints over people being linked and I'm downright sick of people posting in a public place and then complaining they were linked in an unfavorable manner. (Or, in the case of one fucking idiot, a completely neutral manner.) You think I haven't been called crazy, or creepy, or stupid, or had a post fisked?

Guess what, that's their right to do (even if they are wrong) and I do the same damned thing on this blog all the time. If I'm not being threatened or trolled, who the fuck cares if they make fun of me in their own private part of the internet? I have mine to mock them from.

Lock it up if you don't want anyone who disagrees reading.


  1. Dammit, Ragnell, don't you know that common sense has no place on the internet? What're you trying to pull?

  2. Hey, I won't complain about being linked to and mocked...especially since I seem to get a lot of people who stop by because I'm linked to. And mocked.

  3. I could use more being linking and being mocking myself...

  4. Me too.

    Except for the being mocked part. I get enough of that in the "real" world...

  5. I don't need the net to be mocked. I'm married.

  6. What I wonder is why you have to keep explaining this to people? I mean...duh?

    I do remember that particular idiot THAT was an interesting couple of days!


  7. I don't need the net to be mocked. I'm married.

    Ain't that the truth!

  8. You've linked to my blog about 4 times, I think, and although my point of view is frequently different than the majority of the readers of WFA, I'd say that everyone who has posted on my blog has been respectful and thoughtful.

  9. I don't know why these crybabies keep coming to you, Ragnell, but like Sugar says in The Cotton Club, "Treat `im like he was a fireplug. Piss on `im! Piss on `im!"

  10. Also, if your name is "pervyficgirl," this shit is going to happen on a pretty regular basis.

  11. The internet is a public place. It certainly is. Most of us are aware of that. It is a fantastically open marketplace where ideas can battle against other ideas.

    And you know what? Posting for the sole purpose of mocking another person probably is low and messed up. It might be funny. You might enjoy it. But that doesn't make it anything other than low. You are deriving humor by mocking someone else.

    At this point I have to point out the rank hypocrisy of your post, however. Your point that the internet is a public place and people can say WHATEVER they want is well taken. Then, promptly, however you tell other people what they cannot say (in your words, "don't make generalizations about "Bloggers.")

    Doubtless, then, you are a hypocrite.

    Oh and points for reading comprehension. Go back and reread that thread you graciously aren't linking to. It is the professed "blogger" who made that generalization, not the professed "livejournaler." But perhaps you were too busy making a generalization to realize that.

    You are "downright sick" of it? Downright sick? Well then I guess we should all stop right? Because you are sick. But if anyone else says they don't like being linked too (and that is what they said--fundamentally different that saying that bloggers should quit doing it), they should suck it up because you do like it? Please.

    I don't expect this post to last long, because I know the internet isn't that open a space. And I know that people like to bitch at others without being bitched at themselves. But, when you delete this entry, please do me a favor and go back and reread that thread.


  13. Dan, if you're referring to the same thread that Ragnell is then you should look more closely.

    The person who made the generalization was posting anonymously, but was also a former livejournalist who'd deleted her lj for personal reasons. She may or may not have a blog as well, I wouldn't know, but it would probably behoove you to check yourself before you presume to know what's going on.

    That said, if you honestly think that Ragnell's one to shy away from "being bitched at", you really know less than you think you do.

  14. I think honestly the difference here might be that blogger and livejournal tend toward different etiquette expectations. (Of course, I'm likely overgeneralizing based on my own experiences)

    I was thinking of your own generalization, in this case not the other person's statements that most bloggers are "by and large stupid."

    And, frankly, I have no idea who Ragnell is. My expectations are limited to my experience with Kevin who deleted my response to his blog--I assumed that was part of the etiquette of "bloggers."

    Still, if my assumption keeps my post here, then it served its purpose, didn't it? If my post is gone tomorrow, then... well, it also served a purpose.

    Either way, the core question is how far does the reducio go? All the way to ad absurdum?

    Do people have the ability to criticise each other on-line or not? If Ragnell believes that we do, then she is hypocritical in arguing that we don't have that right simply because she is "sick" of it.

    Mock me all you want. I'll live. At least until I die. But Ragnell will still be a hypocrite.

  15. Ahh, that WAS my generalization, yes. I don't always share the same opinion as Ragnell, devoted lackey though I am.

    That was posted however, AFTER, she posted this, so it could not possibly be the generalization to which she's referring.

    I do find the accusation of hypocrisy quite amusing though. It's a blog/livejournal. Everyone's hypocritical on these things because everyone's emotional reaction changes due to different stimuli.

    You're hardly being groundbreaking calling anyone a hypocrite here. We're quite self-aware enough to see the humor in it. :-)

  16. Yeah, Church has a stricter comment policy than I do. He's dealt with a few particularly stupid trolls, so he just doesn't put up with abusive idiocy anymore.

    Honestly, very few bloggers outside of livejournal bother with comment threads for real conversation (Hell, I lose patience with following livejournal comment threads after two or three answers myself). We often answer each other in our blog posts, through linking. We track those links and find them, and we have a lot of crosstalk that way. You can always post about Church on your own blog. He'll likely find and see it, even if he doesn't think its worthy of answering.

    Go ahead and rage your heart out in my comment threads, though. I'd answer your arguments, but I'm having trouble identifying a point worth answering. Perhaps one of the saner readers will see something they agree with and translate it for me.

    In the meantime, I find your spirit entertaining and Kali seems to enjoy kicking you around verbally. Welcome to Written World.

  17. Well, as long as Kalinara tells me you all have the self-awareness to understand the humor of your own hypocrisy, I'm good.

    Frankly, I find it hysterical that you get hyperbolic enough to declare that people shouldn't do something in the midst of complaining that people are talking about why you shouldn't do something. The swirls are very pretty and I'm sure your fans find it quite witty.

    And thanks for the permission to rage to my hearts content. I'll gladly do so. It doesn't surprise me that you can't find a point worth discussing in my previous posts here--it is your playing field of course, and you decide what is in bounds and what is out of bounds.

    And I have no interest in carrying on a conversation with Church. I said my piece. I presume he saw it before deleting. He chose that answer, so I can't think of a single reason why I would try to pursue further contact.

    Just as, I am sure, I will reasonably quickly withdraw from this space. You have responded to me as you will. I accept your response in the spirit with which it was given.

    I have no intention of persuading you as you have no intention of persuading me. I'll stick out in the other thread a bit longer, of course. I can't wait to see what inventive things your fans come up with. Delightful.

  18. Golly gosh, that's a whole lot of words amounting to almost no meaning.

    I'm impressed! I can usually only manage about half that!

  19. Wow, Dan -- that last post was so masturbatory it's a wonder you have a clean sweatsock.

  20. Awesome!

    A comment about my anus and a comment about me masturbating in the same day!

    I am so mortally wounded.

    Thoughtful and introspective readership you have here.

    And gosh darn witty.

    At the end of the day, I know your fans will rally the wagon and tell you how wonderful and brilliant you are and how terrible and stupid I am. Enjoy that time. The glow, the glow is wonderful.

    And still not one person who can be bothered to defend your actual argument. Not surprising. Flame away. I am not the troll here. I have attempted to state my piece clearly and without toilet humor. Musta picked the wrong internet.

    You said people should stop saying these things (about linking). I never did. I never said anyone should not post anything. I just called you a hypocrite. I am happy to engage in discussion. Your fans are happy to engage in low-rent name-calling.


  21. We'd be able to defend if you'd bother to attack my argument coherently. Instead you give us baseless personal attacks and strawmen. Why waste time with civility? This is the level of discourse your first comment laid down anyway.

    Maybe I should just sit back and bask in the idea that you probably found my journal through an undisclosed link and actually dropped by to troll me. The likelihood of that makes your presence that much more entertaining, in light of the nature of my rant.

  22. Goodness, didn't you say you were leaving?

    Honestly, for someone who acts so unconcerned about childish taunts, you certainly come back here to recieve them a lot.

    You've made your case and you'd do a lot better leaving it at that, because at the moment, you merely look like a self-congratulatory mess enamored merely with the sound of your own voice. You've hardly impressed anyone and if you've recieved childish taunts and crudity in response, it's merely what we think your incoherent, insubstantial, poorly structured bit of strawman workmanship and clumsy attempts at verbal slight of hand deserve.

    The masturbation comparison is quite valid, in my opinion.

  23. Oh, I'm leaving, I'm leaving.

    But really, you might want to invest in a dictionary and look up the difference between "reasonably quickly" and "immediately."

    Words are wonderful things.

  24. This is starting to get a little on the bizzare side. Entertaining, but bizarre.

    Don, I've read this all carefully, and I honestly don't understand what you are all worked up about.

    On the other hand, I suppose that I must be a hypocrite as well...there really is nothing like the feeling you get from getting in a good zinger.

  25. Hello Sally P.,
    I'm not entirely sure what this is all about either, anymore. It began elsewhere--a comment in another place got my attention and I came here.

    My particular argument was about the following two sentences:
    ...if the matter consists solely of linking and mocking, its hardly "really low" or "messed up."

    I argued that it was, while potentially funny, "low" because it was an attempt at deriving humor from mocking another person--schaudenfreude, or more likely derision, if you will.

    But don't make generalizations about "Bloggers" (Especially if you are one, and if you have a livejournal, you are one too. Deal with it) and don't make bitter statements about them linking public posts.(emphasis mine)

    I felt then, as I do now that in a post about how open and wild the internet was, making such a proclamation was a bit overboard. So I did what it seemed the original blogger requested and I argued the point.

    Some have taken issue with the fact that I felt my post would likely be deleted. A fact, I happily admit, I was wrong about.

    Some have chosen to go the route of ad hominem and I have responded to them in kind.

    Some claim my argument to be disorganized and strawman-ish. It might be disorganized. I'll take the blame for that. But it is closer to the more technical meaning of ad hominem than strawman. I am, after all, asking the original poster to explain her own words. I did not paraphrase them. And any reader or responder may read both my post and hers to make up their own mind.

    We are all at times hypocrites. I am, myself, clearly posting in a thread I said I was leaving. If that is the answer--that the original poster is just being hypocritical and that is that, then fine. Just say that.

    I was wrong to assume my post would be deleted and that may have been the cause of some of the hostility directed toward me. Fine. I accept that. But that doesn't deter me from asking my questions.

    As I have said over and over again, I am not afraid to be called a fool or a pedant.

  26. "Oh, I'm leaving, I'm leaving.

    But really, you might want to invest in a dictionary and look up the difference between "reasonably quickly" and "immediately.""


    As if there's anything about posting (how many more comments has it been now?) that any normal person would call "reasonably quickly."