Thursday 3 September 2015

Choose Your Fights Wisely

A lot of people out here in the festering swamps of teh interwebs seem to pick some damn stupid fights at times.

How here's a solid example of a good fight to pick: Vox Day when he got together the Rabid Puppies. Targeted, effective, achieveable, measurable. Plus it stuck the knife into some SJW pricks and twisted, good'n'hard. Good bonus there, watching those little pieces of shit squirm and listening to them squeal. Excellent payoff for all and sundry, whether participating or just watching from the sidelines.

Now here is a rough idea of a bad fight to pick: exchanging internet jabs with a pansy/troll/thing that you just know for shit-damn-sure will absolutely refuse to fuck off and die. No matter what you do, you're never going to be able to finish the job.

So I find myself wondering at times, why people do this. These pointlessly boring internet feuds. It's not like an old-style family feud, where you can punch the sonofabitch in the face or shoot him. You can't nuke the site from orbit. Even if you could and did, this cockroach just comes back.

So why waste the energy and time on a brainless troll? All you're doing is validating the troll. "Wooo, he answered me! I must be important!" Preen, masturbate, etc.

Targeted - yeah I suppose so.

Effective - not at all.

Achievable - hell no!

Measurable - only in its overall banal pointlessness.

When you see two people do this, it comes across as - to use "mainstream manosphere" terminology - a pair of Gamma's engaging in an endless bout of verbal posturing and ego-masturbation. Like women, they attempt to drown the other in a bottomless pile of shit - the one who piles on the most shit "wins".

Though of course, neither can admit to being beaten - the eternal posturing part - so it's always hammer-and-tongs banality, ad infinitum.

Dull. Boring. Pointless. Juvenile.

15 comments:

  1. Demonstrating that troll is, in fact, a troll for the benefit of onlookers is not a waste of time. It makes it easier to ignore him(?) in the future.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ^ '...that the troll...'
      English is hard, LOL.

      Delete
    2. Once, yes, totally. Ongoing pointless feeds with a troll though, LOLOLOLOL....

      The problem with arguing with an idiot over the Internet is that they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience. Le sigh.

      Delete
    3. Not every idiot is a troll. Honest idiots are not. Only when someone doesn't believe in his own position, and makes it up as it goes, hoping for a rise from his responders, that is what makes him a troll.

      Delete
    4. All trolls argue in bad faith.

      Delete
    5. And for 'rise' I meant 'emotional reaction'. It's 'internets 101', back from the times when somethingawful was the trolls' den of choice. :)

      Delete
  2. https://emmatheemo.wordpress.com/2015/09/02/i-have-a-sex-tape/ - why fight at all? Our female allies are leading the fight already, sacrificing their privacy for a higher cause. /sarc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Shit oh dear.

      Tells you a lot about our so-called Red Pill Women, doesn't it. I can't really be arsed commenting more about that - they're all the same.

      Delete
    2. My opinion is that people should have the right to shoot themselves in the foot without the obligation to wear bulletproof footwear. But that doesn't mean that I would shoot myself to demonstrate my dedication. :)

      Delete
  3. I used to sometimes comment on sites like Jizzebel, but there was never ever any response to my points. It was only "misogynist this" or "privilege that", yada yada yada. So I stopped. I couldn't care a rat's ass what they thought of me, but then I figured: why am I wasting my valuable time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes indeed. If you say anything there that doesn't fit their approved narrative, you're instantly branded as a troll indulging in hatespeech.

      Delete
  4. Off-topic: BPS, you might find this interesting:
    http://www.psmag.com/nature-and-technology/17-to-1-reproductive-success - my guess is that it was not PUAs that were successful then and there. :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, before I forget. It's thanks to Nick Land that I had the opportunity to read this article.

      Delete
    2. I would gladly share a drink with this guy:
      https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2015/09/05/shes-keeping-her-vow/#comment-188067

      Delete