- New addition to trollwatch: “eleoptene”
- And something between a playful LULZing troll and a crusading anti-troll: “recurringtrollouter”
- Images don’t link anywhere: those familiar with the source-site will recognize it; others probably won’t. All pseudonyms have been censored, except my own and those of trolls
Some material of interest for anyone out there being trolled / bullied online: have a look at the bully-trolls’ strategies, especially their perverse use of terms like “bully” against the very people they themselves are attacking. No, that’s not “irony”: it’s malicious, destructive nastiness.
Look also at what trolls accuse others of, and how:
Are you being ripped off?
Want to see how your serum measures up against the competition?
Looking for a vitamin C serums with specific actives? This might be the case if, say, you’ve tried an l-ascorbic acid one and your skin has reacted: maybe try out one based on magnesium ascorbyl phosphate. Or if you have a vitamin C serum you like, and you’re wondering if there’s a cheaper dupe. Or one based on the same functional active, but with more of it. Or less of other things like added fragrance. Or that’s cruelty-free. Has a less silly name. Comes with less marketeering, sales pitches, sketchy pseudoscientific pubvertising, and branding foolishness.
Or maybe you want to spend more money, on a smaller bottle, with a prettier label.
Anyway. Whatever the reason, if you’re looking, this post might help. Continue reading
Continuing on from the return of the lady of shalott, another example of a common online issue and a suggestion on what to do with it. Public service information service:
1. ANTOINETTE (neither her real name nor an online pseudonym) posts constantly on a certain issue on a certain public discussion board. “Board flooding.” Asks the same questions over and over again. JOCASTA is a regular on that same board. S/he also receives many messages off-board (this website has a “private message / mail” area too), being a knowledgeable and helpful person. She has had much correspondence in the past (usually about that same issue) with ANTOINETTE, as well as interacting with her on that board. ANTOINETTE asks the same question on that same discussion board yet again. JOCASTA calls her out on it that discussion board. ANTOINETTE then sends her many off-board private messages. Each one a paragraph long. For hours and hours and hours. All day. Meanwhile, JOCASTA is at work.
What to do next?
As JOCASTA puts it,
Can a 50 year old woman really be that dumb? I mean REALLY??
- service with a smile (2011-07)
Well, we’re back!
Back with a difference.
No more service.
Tolerance and patience have reached their limits.
[Ed. Now updated with notes indicating which parts of what follows are METAPHORICAL. The reason for this is that there have been misreadings, elsewhere; while bad reading is to blame, I must also blame my own bad writing. Even though it's in the nature of the figurative to be opaque and ambiguous, I must take my share of the fault here, as Chief Fool of my own blog.
Also, as this post is about vice. And an important first step in dealing with one's own sins is to look clearly, and to acknowledge them. I try to remember this:
He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.”
The good reader will too.]
As have time and energy: hell, I have other things to do, and other ways to spend leisure time. Like what, say you? (Cheeky monkey.) Like digressing in a leisurely way, says I; which as we’ve seen previously is a crucial leisure activity. Like writing about having other things to do. At great and tedious length. See this here post? That’s over 3,500 words’ worth of digressionary idle chatter: I admit that at least half of that is mine, and I also admit that it’s a far cry from Wordsworth. Now, wouldn’t it be bloody brilliant if we all (myself included, and first and foremost) put that much time and effort and dedication into writing novels and poetry and political rants and generally Using The Pen To Benefit Humankind And For The Greater Good Of The Entire World, Universe, And Anything Else There Might Be And Mayhap Might Come To Be, Potentially, In All Eternity And In Every Dimension / Possible World / Et Caetera Ad Infinitum Et Ultra?
Hence why, if writing anything more than 500 words long, it must include at least a Moral Of The Story (or two, or more; such things usually go in multiples), if not a full-on rant for at least a paragraph. I think I’ve obeyed that rule so far; will try my best to follow it henceforth. That compromise is the best I can do. After all, retrospection is all too easy: it makes one want to punch both one’s own past-self and one’s future-self, simultaneously and at once, and irrespective/disrespectful of not disrupting the time-space continuum. And legislation cannot, in a proper good fair just system, be retroactive. That might also be for good sound space-time-continuum-preserving sci-fi reasons too.
Anyway. That’s at least one digression out the way. Onwards and upwards and back on-track:
Yes, it’s nice to be great and good and know stuff. To be Richesce personnified. And it’s nice to then do something about it and incarnate that greatest of Medieval virtues, Largesce. But remember, remember: Continue reading
Ah, that fateful combination: MUA and MUAers. Another one: money, lack of sense, and charlatans. And another: money, ignorance (possibly combined with laziness and/or stupidity), and credulence (and, again, smart savvy charlatans).
So here’s a third one in the series of failures to (a) read, (b) reason, (c) get the point. And nth in a row of Ginger failures. I should start adding “pls read” before the “ROP++” in subject-lines.
And no, I refuse to stop thinking, speaking, and writing in blocks of less than 500 words, let alone full paragraphs or complete sentences.
Which may well, of course, mean that the pattern continues and the aforementioned “n” continues to be a very large number.
Adding in comment, further to yesterday’s Thought For The Day about bottoms: euphemism of the day!
“It’s all relative” = “wrong / false / untrue”
EXPANSION WITH POSSIBLE RATIONALE:
- innocence and ignorance: the speaker genuinely pseudo-thinks (or, “believes”) that everything really is relative and that there are no such things as rights or wrongs
- speaker is too dense to understand such differences, and does not hear and understand when they are explained (using their own utterances as examples). They may or not also be blind, deaf, and generally insensitive: to what others say, to being in a conversation, to any learning experience and experience of change (which all communication is, or should be).
- the speaker cannot possible be wrong, as they are the only right entity in the universe, and otherwise the universe would implode, explode, or otherwise cease to exist. This may also be called the superstitious approach: not wishing to jinx the continuing existence of the universe (and oneself).
- spoiled pampered princess: cannot possibly be wrong, stupid, or foolish because centre of universe (see previous item). Alternative explanation: speaker has been told all their life that they’re a treasure and treasured, a special unique precious brilliant snowflake, and all their faults and flaws have been translated into positive attributes. Everything they say is right, true, and a gift to the rest of humanity: pearls dropping from their lips (and no jokes about alleged extra qualities of Demi Moore’s alleged latest squeeze). This is of course a fascinating kind of illusion and a psychological gem in its own right. But such people are not diamonds. They are delusional, and may even be dangerous.
- passive-aggressive self-defence: speaker knows what they said is in fact wrong, but they have not yet learned the crucial distinction between “what one says” and “oneself”, so they err in the view that they cannot say anything wrong as otherwise they would be wrong.
In many countries, this issue is addressed in kindergarten and is one of the items on the checklist for permitting a child to pass the last year of kindergarten and progress to Primary One.
In many countries (with some intersection with the previous category), there is also a deliberate re-blurring of the categories, accompanied by infantilization and regression and encouragement of monstrous egotism, in postgraduate study. Especially, irony of ironies, in the “humanities.” Blame Derrida and the religious cult constructed around him. OK, not just him: blame the place of theory in that end of academia.
OK. On which happy note of blaming Derrida (and his mis-translators, and idiot Dummy’s Guide / Spark Notes pseudo-digested versions, and second-hand drivvel based on sketchy skim-mis-reading, and the vagaries of foolish fashion)—on wards and upwards, to a quite delicious recent bout of MUAing. Putting the phenomenon that follows below in its historical context, this might be this year’s incarnation of The Spring Troll. It might, being flat-footed and practical, just / also be a foolish young creature. Hell, the web’s full of them these days, and they get younger and younger every year. But at least it’s always nice to see young people able to read and write. After a fashion…
As ever, some miscommunications and misunderstandings on both sides (this is something I find professionally fascinating. But I digress in geeky glee.). And, as ever, right and wrong on both sides. Let the good reader see and judge for herself: without further comment, or indeed further ado: Continue reading