Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Savage Love Letter of the Day


If you're 34, that must make me 29.


Posted by NapoleonXIV | August 27, 2008 3:26 PM

34? That has to be a typo. Don't want that misnomer to get out on the 'net!

Posted by atlsea | August 27, 2008 3:31 PM

isn't it rather disingenuous to say your 34 on a post discussing cached information?

Posted by Jiberish | August 27, 2008 3:32 PM

I'd never believe wine advice garnered from a website run by children. What an absurd idea.

Re: 34 - wasn't it Juvenal who wrote that young men differ as to their beauty but 34 year olds all look alike.

Posted by kinaidos | August 27, 2008 3:38 PM

homosexual, please. FORTY 4.

and COUNT YOUR COMMAS: "I run a young (I’m 28), fun, wine publication..."

Posted by max solomon | August 27, 2008 3:38 PM

"I make business deals via Facebook messages."

This is all anyone really needs to know.

Posted by levide | August 27, 2008 3:38 PM

gods bless my generic name

Posted by Non | August 27, 2008 3:39 PM

Okay, now the "34" has a link to a footnote which links to a story about Dan fudging his age during an interview. - It's an audio-visual to prove the point of the blog.
(The link wasn't there originally.)

Posted by atlsea | August 27, 2008 3:40 PM

geesh, it's a old joke, but a joke nonetheless.

Tyler is a douche, but I probably wouldn't hire anyone who would use their real name when they post x-rated shit. Not because of the x-rated nature of the material, but because they were that stupid...

Posted by michael strangeways | August 27, 2008 3:50 PM

@4 Word, as they say. I googled "young fun wine" and wouldn't want to spend much time with any of them at their singles mixers. A thing called "Wine X Magazine" popped up and is apparently aimed at selling things of dubious value to the young and self-entitled.

Posted by inkweary | August 27, 2008 3:52 PM

Christ, Tyler. You're 28, not 15. You are not "growing up" right now, you're a damn adult just like Dan is and you're acting like a self-important twat.

I guess, though, that the internet being what it is, a great place to stigmatize someone, I now know to avoid "young, fun, wine publication[s]" by d-bags named Tyler. (I'd like to link his publication here, it's a simple google away after all, but he'd probably enjoy the publicity too much.)

Posted by ryan | August 27, 2008 3:54 PM

I'm always amazed by how much Dan has accomplished in such a short time. It's inspiring.

Posted by brian | August 27, 2008 3:55 PM

Reading comprehension. It's a generational thing, I guess, for us older folks.

Posted by Tracy | August 27, 2008 4:00 PM

young, and fun and, gosh darn, people like him.

Posted by ellarosa | August 27, 2008 4:01 PM

Assholes like you ruin the party for everybody else, Tyler. Fuck off and die.

Posted by Greg | August 27, 2008 4:06 PM

Oh, Tyler. Within five years your little venture will be surpassed in readership and value by a more relevant and Internet-savvy operation that doesn't give two shits what their employees were posting on Facebook, in fact, it might even hire a few of those notorious folks for an additional buzz factor.

You're old media already, Tyler. You just don't know it yet.

Posted by DB | August 27, 2008 4:11 PM

Dudes, the Wayback Machine and logs existed DECADES before.

You've never been safe on the Big Bad Net.

(young and gullible ...)

Posted by Will in Seattle | August 27, 2008 4:25 PM

I love knowing that young whippersnappers are evaluating my "media savvy" negatively based on my lack of compulsive myspace and facebook updating. Means I'll never have to work for such a douche.

Posted by Terry | August 27, 2008 4:29 PM

Tyler, from one young, fun person to another, you need to calm the fuck down. Surely you've got a glass of wine handy?

Posted by Darcy | August 27, 2008 4:40 PM

@9 - okay Michael Strangeways, so let me get this straight. This is the reasoning in your comment right?

1) Taking a particular action - let's call it "Action X" - is not morally wrong in any way, and in fact may be something socially positive.

2) However, taking "action X" often exposes (no pun intended) oneself to social ridicule from small-minded assholes.

3) By your judgement, taking action X is therefore "stupid" and you wouldn't hire anyone who took action X because anyone who did that is "that stupid."

So basically, in order to not be stupid and get hired by you, one would have to avoid violating idiotic social rules that might expose one to ridicule from small-minded assholes.

Did I get that right?

Posted by Captain Jack | August 27, 2008 4:42 PM

kinda like when people with visible tattoos started to be able to get jobs!

Posted by hillpagan | August 27, 2008 4:44 PM

Facebook isn't an open book to look at like some other places are. You have to be on their list of friends to see their profile. And having a boss on that list is not a good idea.

Posted by alittleTwittertoldme | August 27, 2008 4:47 PM

Really Tyler? You think that creating a profile on MySpace or Facebook demonstrates that someone is "saavy?" Here I though it just demonstrated that someone is either 12 years old, unduly juvenile and self-obsessed, or otherwise just has too much goddamned free time on their hands.

The whole world doesn't need to know and shouldn't care what's on my iPod playlists, what actor I'm tooootally obsessed with currently, or what mood I'm in this afternoon.

Fucking twat.

Posted by Hoyt Clagwell | August 27, 2008 4:48 PM

But the main point is that the fucking twat didn't even understand what Dan had written in the first place!

He thought he was going to "school" old Dan on the Powers of 2.0 Youth, but he can't even read critically!

Posted by Tracy | August 27, 2008 5:04 PM

Anybody that makes business deals via Facebook comments without any other contact information is probably the same kind of douche bag that texts 50 messages on his drive to work each day while he drives with his knees. It isn’t a matter of a ‘young’ or ‘old’ economy/style of business/relationship with technology, but lazy pukes thinking the internet will set them free from building real relationships with real people.

Posted by PDX_Paulie | August 27, 2008 5:06 PM

So...does Tyler also refuse to hire people who have tattoos?

What about those of us who are OK about having sexual material online, forever, searchable and easy to find? If I post a wank vid with my face exposed and my ass up in the air, it is stupid to assume that I don't have an understanding "inside and out" of that vid's availability.

Pro-sex, GGG, and libertarian, huh? I don't think so.

Posted by meggers | August 27, 2008 5:06 PM

we should figure out Tyler in Boston's last name and forever link him to this letter via comments.

Posted by jean enersen's life-destroying internets | August 27, 2008 5:31 PM

You guys are dreaming if you really think the online wank vid will go the way of the visible tat.

But here's hoping, right?

Posted by Mike in MO | August 27, 2008 5:39 PM

Sex-positive doesn't mean what it used to.

Will, "decades", being plural, means a bare minimum of 20 years. Please provide links to what the Wayback Machine looked like in 1988 (before the web existed).

Seriously, is it too much to ask for you to post ONE FACTUAL STATEMENT in a day?

Posted by Fnarf | August 27, 2008 5:46 PM

@ 27

Tyler Balliet seems like a good bet

He's the first hit that comes up when you google "Tyler Boston wine publication" and googling his name brings up facebook, linkedin and various other accounts necessary to demonstrate his computer saavy.

Posted by The internets links | August 27, 2008 5:54 PM

Hey Tyler, two weeks ago I fired someone because they destroyed a company computer trying to get around the firewall we set up to block Facebook (and MySpace.) We've been having trouble with the younger employees not understanding that networking is not the same as actually working. It just makes me want to slap idiots like you.

Posted by Mrs O'Lady | August 27, 2008 6:22 PM

Tyler Balliet's wine mag is called The Second Glass: He's awfully pretty; I imagine girls tell him he looks like Jim from the Office all the time. I imagine there will be some people sad that he has no jerkoff videos on the net.

Posted by Fnarf | August 27, 2008 6:26 PM

no matter how much you want it to be true, I really doubt that a day will come when everyone has their own sex tape online.

have you put yours up yet?

Posted by josh | August 27, 2008 7:34 PM

Tyler is aware of all Internet traditions.

Posted by Sirkowski | August 27, 2008 8:10 PM

4 inches, no more.

Posted by Ivan | August 27, 2008 8:10 PM

Jeez, he's hiring people for a wine website, not to carry the f-ing nuclear football.

Posted by Quincy | August 27, 2008 8:37 PM

Well, how fun is it that Tyler Balliet is internet "saavy" enough to go around trhying to pedantically chastise nationally syndicated sex and relationship columnists, but not saavy enough to use a goddamned alias or fully consider the ramifications of slamming the man responsible for forever connecting Rick Santorum to a frothy mixture of semen and fecal matter that is the byproduct of anal sex?

Hey, Tyler Balliet: How totally awesome would it be if for the next few years, Googling your name would bring up references to "jerk off videos?"

Tyler looks like a type of individual I had too much experience with in high school and my first couple of years of college--Mr. I-have-a-four-point-0. Someone who honestly believed that a highly developed ability to regurgitate exam questions equated to being a sophisticated, superior intellectual and made sure everyone they met knew just how fucking smart they [thought they] were.

Posted by Hoyt Clagwell | August 27, 2008 8:50 PM

Oh dear God, he's a hobbit. And he wouldn't have needed to check out Scott, his 'web application architect', on Facebook before hiring him, because apparently he's the backer's obese moron nephew:

Posted by banjoboy | August 27, 2008 10:17 PM

Exposed and ripped to shreds.

Posted by Justin J | August 27, 2008 11:02 PM

So could we hold a contest to come up with a definition for "Balliet"?

Posted by Rocky Dennis | August 28, 2008 2:30 AM

This whole linking his name to sex on the internet forever and ever thing seems so juvenile, but I really want to do it.

Please, let's do it???

Posted by Jen | August 28, 2008 3:21 AM

My god people! You are horrible. And that's so delicious right now.

Tyler Balliet: you are a twat. A massive ass. I do indeed hope you get a little bit of the infamy you so look down upon.


Posted by MarsAttack | August 28, 2008 7:52 AM

I love you guys so much.

Posted by city_kitty | August 28, 2008 10:11 AM

I looked at little Tyler's site.

Turn off numero uno: The staff pictures and bios.

Turn off numero two-o: No one can spell, "Triple Sec."

I teach about managing one's online presence. This one may be an example of how NOT to do it.

PS. He screams too much on his LinkedIn Profile.

Posted by MJESF | August 28, 2008 10:37 AM

Captain Jack...the point is moot anyway, since I'll NEVER, EVER be in a position to hire anyone...To clarify, I don't care what anyone does in the privacy of their own sex organs, as long as everyone involved is of age, willing and human, but I don't have a ton of sympathy for people dumb enough to post nekkid pictures of themselves online with their REAL names tagged to the pictures who then cry foul when people discover said pictures and think poorly of them. MY morals don't care if you want to be naked and public about it, but I'm adult enough to understand that not all people feel the same way and have different morals. If you want the world to see your bunghole branded with your name, that's fine, but then you're going to have to accept the consequences when some people are offended by that.

And I have tons of sympathy for the Vegas reporter who was unfairly fired; he shouldn't be punished for discreetly pursuing outside interests; it's not anyone's business but his own. He chose to do so in a private, discreet manner, even if it was in a public forum; he wasn't using his name, or face, or influence to achieve his desired result, (as far as I'm aware), he was outed by some asshole. BUT, if he'd been posting, "Hey, wanna have a threesome with Joe Blow, the biggest dicked Consumer Affairs reporter in the Vegas metro area!", and was using his public status, name or face to get laid, then I wouldn't have as much sympathy for him.

And, as for those Nebraska wrestlers, they're adults and were compensated for those pictures; it wasn't a "private" matter; it was a business deal. True, they didn't use their real names but they were full faced pictures on a commercial website dedicated to displaying full faced, full frontal naked pictures of young men. It sucks that they were shit-canned, and I agree with Dan that a little sex appeal would do wonders for the world of amateur athletics, but those were public pictures; if they didn't realize that when they made the deal, well, I guess they learned a valuable lesson. (I also have a hard time sympathizing for straight guys going the "gay for pay" route, but I guess if certain dumbass gays are willing to pay for it, then I shouldn't complain...but I will.)

Posted by michael strangeways | August 28, 2008 10:40 AM

Okay, first, Ffnarf, look again, he's not pretty, he's a troll, who needs a haircut, badly. And some sun. He's a little pasty.

And second, thanks again for the laughs, guys. I love when Dan posts these things. You just made my day again.

And, seriously, Tyler. How stupid are you? Was this a dare? If I were as computer savvy as you claim to be, I would never send in a letter like that, with that much personal information, and sign my real name, and location. I'm not savvy, but I never use my name, just my initials, my email address is also a nickname, not my name or anything close, and I never use my real address or city. You must be retarded. But at least your magazine is getting a lot of hits.

Posted by Charm | August 28, 2008 10:56 AM

Tyler is exactly right, and you people are idiots.

Posted by MBI | August 28, 2008 11:20 AM

@47 oh really now? He's exactly right is he?

He may be right about just about one thing: once its on the internet it's there forever. Everything else, though, including what he thinks should be the repercussions of putting something up, are horribly juvenile, and incredibly wrong.

I mean seriously, can you honestly say a person is "exactly right" who hires people based on the activity level of their facebook or myspace pages? Really? Are you twelve?

Posted by MarsAttack | August 28, 2008 3:31 PM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.