Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on What He Said


Elenchos does have a point. Unfortunately, it's on the top of his head.

Posted by Big Sven | January 25, 2008 5:40 PM

A point? The book of elenchos is only secondary to the Books of Bokonon.

Posted by whatever | January 25, 2008 5:40 PM

Totally true, and it was self-fulfilling.

Posted by left coast | January 25, 2008 5:41 PM

Just kidding, e. I promise to not respond to Ecce or Issur or that one racist dude again.

Posted by Big Sven | January 25, 2008 5:41 PM

sure, you linked for the slog-centric content, but that's a good read from tufte as well.

Posted by donte | January 25, 2008 5:41 PM

Even winning Strangercrombie won't give you the kind of rockstar status that you can get from relentlessly dogging them on their blog.

No kidding.

Posted by JMR | January 25, 2008 5:46 PM

JMR, what happened to you, man? You posted like twice in your valedictory week. Tell us the juicy details! Or post them on your blog.

Posted by Big Sven | January 25, 2008 6:06 PM

Just don't relentlessly blog them on their dogs, or I can tell you from experience, some unwanted leg-humping will ensue.

Posted by bill | January 25, 2008 6:07 PM

I'm having Mr. Poe withdrawal.

Posted by Jubilation T. Cornball | January 25, 2008 6:12 PM

JMR, what happened to you, man? You posted like twice in your valedictory week. Tell us the juicy details! Or post them on your blog.

I'll fill in the details when I win again this December.

Posted by JMR | January 25, 2008 6:18 PM

elenchos is made of win. I raise a glass to him.

And it's true - you'll invariably get far more attention for a shitty, vile rebuttal than a thoughtful one. Although I don't think this is necessarily unique to Slog.

Posted by tsm | January 25, 2008 6:42 PM

Elenchos is just being divisive.

As usual.


Posted by NapoleonXIV | January 25, 2008 8:18 PM

Elenchos is indirectly saying that Slog is becoming really popular, as most popular blogs have poor quality comments percentages and plenty of trolls.

This will become the Big Debate of '08. "Dot Blog: Success equals unreadable comments threads? And this is supposed to be good for revenue?"

I'm not criticizing Slog. I'm just stating that when popularity is a direct reflection of uglier user feedback, it's time to ask questions about the blog model for revenue purposes.

Posted by mackro mackro | January 25, 2008 8:36 PM

Maybe Slog should go to a no-comments/"trackback" only model; this is what Andrew Sullivan does -- since we're on the subject -- and then he weeds out any of the critical trackbacks, which is a pretty interesting approach for a free-speech advocate.

Posted by thegayrecluse | January 25, 2008 9:45 PM
To clarify, add detail. imagine that: to clarify add detail. Clutter and overload are not an attribute of information, they are a failure of design. If the information is in chaos, don't start throwing out information. Instead fix the design.
Doesn't it just give you goosebumps? It gives me goosebumps.

@13, I'm not bothered by the trolls. I just ignore them. I'm bothered by the undeserved attention the trolls are given. If you reply to a troll, the troll wins. If you say a troll's name, the troll wins. If you allude to a troll, the troll wins. No ifs, ands or buts.

The highest complement on the Internet is to acknowledge someone exists. The lowest cut is to act like you never heard them.

Posted by elenchos | January 25, 2008 9:47 PM

Okay. So what? What will you do about it? Not just you, Dan, but the other aforementioned writers.

Posted by Gomez | January 25, 2008 10:05 PM

The Slogger who handles trolls best is Charles although he is also a troll with some of those posts.

Posted by PA Native | January 25, 2008 10:23 PM

You people think that calling someone who disagrees with your opinions a "troll" is dismissive.

The truth is, as long as you live, you will never have enough of a spine to accept that you are not the smartest, brightest, most special, coolest, and swellest people in the room. This seems to be a huge problem with kids from the 90's. All those ribbons for "achievement" or "Participation", and the general derision of competition, has left you scrotumless and stupid.

Go ahead, instead of dealing with disagreement, just label them a troll. It's SO much easier than standing up for your opinion.

At least Dan has balls from time to time.

Posted by ecce homo | January 25, 2008 10:55 PM

Hey Ecce, you didn't call me last night. Shame. I just bought a reversible crack pipe. The fun you missed, you won't BELIEVE.

Posted by Mr. Poe | January 26, 2008 7:57 AM

See my comment on Frizzelle's "False Information" post.

Seriously, it's past time for me to stop bothering with The Stranger and Slog--and not because of the commentators.

Posted by Boomer in NYC | January 26, 2008 8:17 AM

@15: In that case, thank you, Elenchos, for often responding to my posts. Even though it's usually to disagree with them.

Posted by RainMan | January 26, 2008 9:35 AM
Posted by *gong* | January 26, 2008 9:37 AM

Jesus, Boomer. For someone who's "done with Slog," you're sure spending a lot of time on here telling everybody about it.

Slog isn't perfect by any means, but they do seem pretty transparent in what's going on behind the scenese, which is kind of nice, imho. Most publications would never talk about their inner debates like this.

Posted by Just Go Already, Then | January 26, 2008 9:48 AM
Seriously, it's past time for me to stop bothering with The Stranger and Slog

GOODBYE CRUEL BLOG!!!!!!!!!!!!!111one

Posted by tsm | January 26, 2008 9:57 AM

Totally agree. Don't feed the trolls, please.

I always have to remind myself that people sometimes are drunk or high when they post. Or they disagree with themselves three posts later.

Posted by me | January 26, 2008 10:04 AM

leave them where they belong, under the fremont bridge.

Posted by orangekrush | January 26, 2008 11:13 AM

People, people, all this kvetching about trolls and how to handle them is just another form of "feeding". The troll in question (hiya ecce!) knows who we're talking about, so it's pointless to try to generalize the discussion in hopes that will somehow make a difference.

And yes, some trolls will eventually give up and move on if ignored. But, like the compulsive gambler, many simply can't (and ecce has already mentioned a couple of times his intent to bow out - but he keeps coming back), because they live with the irrational hope that the NEXT win will make up for the long, debilitating string of losses.

Trolls are simply mashochists at their core; they need to push our buttons, because they crave - not just attention, but more specifically - NEGATIVE attention. They NEED to be hated, it's what gets them off.

So, it helps to remember, YOU have the REAL power in this situation, because the troll needs YOU, not the other way around. Your hate is simply an emotional response to the anger the troll seeks to elicit from you; remove that stimulus, change the emotional content of the response, and the troll get nothing in the way of sustenance back from you.

How do you know when this occurs? Simple: the troll becomes angry, like a petulant child denied a cookie. That's when you know you've pushed the troll's buttons, and once they realize you've turned the tables, THEN they'll go away for good, because they know they aren't going to get from you what they most desperately need - your hate.

Posted by COMTE | January 26, 2008 11:47 AM

Interesting points, COMTE. The problem is the troll-feeders are also getting off. They are people who love to argue for the sake of arguing, and don't really care if the conversation of the thread gets derailed. Troll-enablers have mutated into trolls themselves. (Full discloser: I am not infrequently guilty of this, though I'm more of a hit-and-run poster. I'll post a response, and then never check the thread again.)

And it's true. If Dan and Erica and all the rest truly want to elevate the level of discourse on Slog (they don't actually seem to want to do this, other than the occasional complaining about trolls), then they would highlight constructive, thoughtful, interesting comments. I have rarely, if ever, seen them do this. You encourage behavior you acknowledge.

Posted by exelizabeth | January 26, 2008 12:02 PM

All this just cause I said that ECB needed to get laid? Jeesh...

Posted by ecce homo | January 26, 2008 12:54 PM

Do you guys really not know who Ecce is? It's funny, I promise. And knowing makes it impossible to actually get upset about anything he says.

This post reminds me of my response to the hullaballo Belleve Ave caused on the Heath Ledger thread ( Really?

It's one thing for people who don't read Slog very often to bite the bait, but regulars, who should be familiar with agendas and talking points by now, should know better. Unless they, *gasp*, like the drama and attention they get when they engage a troll. All the benefits of people reading your comments, none of the messy guilt over being a trolling attention whore!

Posted by Aislinn | January 26, 2008 12:59 PM

How does Aislinn @30 know who ecce is? Unless...OMG! Aislinn is Condoleeza Rice!!!

Posted by RainMan | January 26, 2008 1:23 PM

hey Dan have you checked out
"friend lf lineout" 206proof --
hip hop website lately? regular anti-gay comments in forum like

First, you're a complete fucking faggot, Donut Boy. Do me a favor and go get a neck. P.s. make another t-shirt with a turntable on it, dork. Second, I got fucked with by them bouncers like 5 years ago at a show that Z-trip was playing. It was a Microsoft event ...

... but I'm not. I just think it's homo when people come on here and use fake names... Use your real name. The only reason you would use a fake one is if you were scared of what people think of your comments.. So yeah, BEAST is a fag.. bitch

Hey kub, get off the net and hitthe block with those cds fag boy. :)

as do i damnit *punches dawson for being such a fag*

Go back to the massline boards, you peace loving faggot. Dirtbag...[/

kanye's trouble is that he tends to make sense so the shots directed towards him are generally either manifestations of pure hate or comments on his habit of occasionally dressing like a faggot.

uote][cite] c.attle:[/cite]Seattle is full of pussies! Flower hiphop and emotional bullshit. Stick with what you say and mean it. All you fags talk shit and when a cat gets at you, you fuckin fold. Mean what the fuck you say before ...

Posted by hey dan | January 26, 2008 1:54 PM

OK, so what the hell did that mean?

Posted by ecce homo | January 26, 2008 2:30 PM

@31: My information is second-hand, and I have absolutely no proof whatsoever. But, it is corroborated by things like this:

Think about it, people.

Posted by Aislinn | January 26, 2008 4:01 PM

Wow, @34, I don't know how I could have possibly missed that thread!

And not to beat the dead horse on that particular subject, but it does only seem fair to give ecce credit where it's due; obviously he's a strong union supporter, and he totally gets props from me for being on the side of the good guys on that one.

However, he's decidedly off-base calling Dan a "scab" for appearing on Maher's show, as it's obvious he didn't cross a picket-line to replace a union member who would otherwise have been doing that particular "work". Clearly, it's just another example of ecce's penchant for hysterical hyperbole getting in the way of an accurate assessment of the situation.

Dan could be called a lot of other things for what he did: an anti-union sympathizer at worst, or just an uninformed, unenlightened rube, if one wishes to be charitable. But, "scab" is a special designation that really should be reserved for those who fit the definition; using the term indiscriminately merely serves to weaken the negative perception it should engender.

Be that as it may, it still doesn't do much for me in terms of giving away ecce's identity; not that I really care one way or the other.

Posted by COMTE | January 26, 2008 5:36 PM

ecce = knute berger

Posted by pete maravich's socks | January 26, 2008 6:42 PM

LOL. Probably true, @36.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 26, 2008 7:06 PM

Man, if that were true @36, I'd have to say that either old Knute has finally taken a double-gainer off the deep end, or he's developed a brilliantly accurate parody of a trollish personality type.

Because that's the thing: you can never really tell for certain which type you're dealing with - a certifiable wack-job, or, a perversely sane person who enjoys making other people THINK they're a certifiable wack-job.

Which is, well, kind of wack in itself, if you think about it...

Posted by COMTE | January 27, 2008 10:08 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).