Deadbeat neighbor: “So, how was your Thanksgiving?”
Me: “None of your business, chickenshit.”
Deadbeat neighbor: “Wow. Where did that come from?”
Me: “Oh, like you’ve never criticized anyone before?”
Deadbeat neighbor: “Well, of course I have, but –”
Me: “– But nothing. Hypocrite.”
Deadbeat neighbor: “– No, I’m not a hypocrite. I’m just wondering why you called me a name out of the blue like that –”
Me: “– I see, so you can criticize others to your heart’s content, but when somebody dares criticize you, it’s time to start bitching. That it?”
Deadbeat neighbor: “I’m not bitching. I’m just saying that an unprovoked attack is maybe uncalled for –”
Me: “Sure, whatever. Stifle my dissent, fascist.”
Deadbeat neighbor: ‘Dissent’? But I don’t understand. What are you dissenting from, exactly –?”
Me: “– Forget it. If you’re into censorship, you’re into censorship…”
Deadbeat neighbor: “But I didn’t censor you. I’m simply asking why you attacked me like that –”
Me: “– Hey, don’t blame the victim, pal. If the jackboot fits, y’know…?”
Deadbeat neighbor: “…All I wanted to tell you was that we had a delicious deep-fried turkey –”
Me: “Yeah, that’s right, change the subject. You chickenshit hypocrite dissent-crushing censor fascist. Now let me into your house so I can bang your wife.”*
Comment by SophieZ on 11/30 @ 8:50 pm #
You are fucking brilliant.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 11/30 @ 8:52 pm #
Before I followed the link, I thought you were spraying both barrels at Oliver. After, I’m back to being confused.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 11/30 @ 8:55 pm #
You need to look at Bill’s last update. There’s a backstory here, but I’m not interested in giving the couple of blogs in question any traffic.
Sophie–
Naw. I just curse creatively is all. But thanks.
Comment by DWC on 11/30 @ 9:25 pm #
I thought it was the tryptophan talkin’.
Comment by Steve on 11/30 @ 9:46 pm #
I had Bill yelling at me a couple of weeks ago because of a critical trackback post (a post update actually) that used the word “bullshit” to describe one of his conclusions (not very artful of me, I admitted). He was nastier in his response than I was in my post and seemed very sensitive to criticism. So I find this new post rather revealing. I’m glad I don’t deal with much of that crap.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 11/30 @ 9:52 pm #
Yeah. If you’re attacked consistently enough, you tend to get defensive after a while, and you lash out at people who you know in retrospect probably didn’t deserve it.
For my part, I try not to let it bother me. But in my opinion, the two blogs going after Bill for the post I linked to are arguing from a position of complete ignorance.
Comment by Steve on 11/30 @ 10:13 pm #
I tried to leave on comment on Bill’s site, a fairly complimentary one in fact, and it won’t take. I wonder if I’m banned.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 11/30 @ 10:20 pm #
For those of us who don’t read Bill’s critics, though, it was awfully confusing.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 11/30 @ 10:27 pm #
I’ll see if I can’t be less confusing in the future, then.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 11/30 @ 10:34 pm #
I tried to leave on comment on Bill’s site, a fairly complimentary one in fact, and it won’t take. I wonder if I’m banned.
Not that I know of …
Comment by Bill from INDC on 11/30 @ 10:45 pm #
He was nastier in his response than I was in my post and seemed very sensitive to criticism.
I don’t believe that I swore at you; I believe I tackled your reference with brutality (I can’t remember too many specifics, this is a daily occurrence), and told you that your tone was disrespectful. I don’t believe that this is stifling dissent.
A common hallmark of internet critics is that they use incendiary language and then recoil in horror when someone serves up a hot response. It’s astounding what people feel is appropriate to initiate a discussion, yet then find so objectionable when they gte it back. It’s serious dissonance.
While your post wasn’t all that bad (comparatively) and I let you have it a bit, “with all due respect, that’s bullshit,” is sort of an encapsulated oxymoron. You were not banned.
Comment by Slartibartfast on 11/30 @ 10:47 pm #
Ok, I’ve finally got it figured out. And now that I have, I’m going to agree that little to nothing would be added by linking the source of the idiocy.
Still, the parallel with Oliver’s seemingly unending diatribe against Republicans was uncanny. Maybe it’s just one of those days in which no amount of caffeine suffices, though.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 11/30 @ 10:54 pm #
Well, it was meant to stand in for anyone like those two thorns. So Oliver’s unending diatribe fits, too. I almost didn’t link to Bill’s post (because I didn’t want to cause confusion), but I figured for those who like puzzles….
Comment by McGehee on 11/30 @ 11:06 pm #
I considered commenting on the INDC post Jeff linked, and I went through the TypeKey login process (I can’t believe the whiner in the last update was complaining about TypeKey, ferchrissake!), but decided I didn’t really have anything to add to the thread.
That happens to me a lot, and keeps me out of a lot more trouble than I get into.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 11/30 @ 11:46 pm #
Go f*ck yourself, McGehee.
Comment by McGehee on 12/1 @ 1:13 am #
A case in point.
Comment by Dan on 12/1 @ 1:47 am #
Bill and I had a bit of a disagreement that did and should remain mostly private. Fortunately it got worked out and was more likely attributable to word choice, miscommunication and state of mind of two busy people dashing off emails. The internet isn’t the best place for communication. I’m a bit surprised at some of the “macro-blog” criticism I saw as many higher traffic blogs wouldn’t even enter in a dialogue with the complainers. Bill deserves credit for that.
But then since he still hasn’t linked me since we worked things out, F ‘em!! And the fact that I burned out post election and havn’t done anything of substance in a while should have nothing to do with it!! heh
Seriously, as a smaller blog, I can’t imagine the work and effort that goes into building and maintaining a large readership. IMO both Jeff and Bill have built great “products,” or blogs, if you will and they deserve much credit. As far as people thinking another blogger is an asshole, or whatever, I can only say that as a sales and marketing manager, I get paid well everyday to effect that precise end among some who work for me. And it is more often than not coming from those that either ain’t doing their job, or don’t measure up in some way. So – F them, too. And that time I mean it.
Comment by Ahnold on 12/1 @ 2:09 am #
Turns ouwt this is really all abouwt hurt feewings ? You sound like a bunch of girlie-men to me, yah.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 3:22 am #
well, Bill was kind enough to blogroll me early on, but when he discovered he wasn’t on my blogroll he removed me. I explained to him that I had had a friend do my template because I didn’t know how and that friend would put him on as soon as he could. I finally got it done (even figured it out myself!) and asked Bill to put me back on. He wouldn’t answer my e-mail or my posts.
I’m thinking he’s touchy.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 12/1 @ 3:32 am #
Perhaps. But isn’t that the point of his post—that being constantly bombarded with requests, criticisms, etc., wears on you after a while, and so Brokaw’s advice might be sound?
And then didn’t somebody respond to that post by calling Bill a “chickenshit” for using TypePad?
Touchy or not, I think his point is an interesting one. Just saying.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 3:51 am #
I agree about being bombarded. But it just so happened that he was requesting those interested in being blogrolled when I commented that I would like him to. I only e-mailed him when I asked why he had deleted me as a comment on his blog and he requested I don’t ask that on the blog.
It is one thing to get tired of those things, especially any crude, rude remarks and such, but it is another to treat badly those on his side who have never criticized him.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 12/1 @ 3:56 am #
I agree, RWS, and I think Bill said as much in his post—that he’s been short with people who probably didn’t deserve it. But again, the point is, what drives one to become short with people who probably don’t deserve it?
His post is not an excuse for anything, I don’t think; instead, it’s a structural examination of the psychology behind certain communicative behavior. And it is on that level that I’m responding to it. On another level, sure: it’s bad form to be rude to those who treat you well. But assuming for a second that we all know that, then why do we do it anyway? And is the advice Brokaw offered sound advice?
Comment by The Squeaky Wheel on 12/1 @ 4:06 am #
Love it! So is Dead Beat’s Wife hot? Or is she a dead beat too? A dead lay? WHat gives?
Comment by Kevin on 12/1 @ 4:24 am #
I’m still bummed that the “bombardment” drove Steven Den Beste out of the blogosphere. (Though you see a comment from him now and then, so you know he’s still listening in, at least.) How do you encourage contribution from people who are talented and motivated, but who lack the ability to deal with massive feedback? I’ve been turning the problem over in my mind since SDB called it quits, and still haven’t thought of a good solution for it.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 12/1 @ 4:42 am #
Well, most of the big blogs turn off comments—or open them only on selective posts. Instapundit, Sullivan, Powerline, Malkin…
Either that, or they have open forum posts, like Atrios or Kos.
Third, you develop a cult of loyal protectors to police the comments for you (e.g., LFG).
A few ideas. Personally, I like the LGF approach, but it doesn’t always take. Charles is in a fairly unique position, I’d say—though Den Beste would likely have been able to pull the same thing off.
For my part, when I came back after my hiatus of 18 months, I decided I’d just delete the commenters who I didn’t like. And—and this is the important part—I wouldn’t allow myself to feel guilty about it. Once you drop the idealism and embrace blog pragmatism, an enormous weight is lifted off of you.
Comment by red state moron on 12/1 @ 4:52 am #
As a recovering Catholic, and moron living in fly over country, I am, speaking for myself (as an individual…..as we used to say in Chicago…..), glad you got over the guilt.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 4:56 am #
I see this is “discuss our relationships with Bill” day. It’s really fun, let me tell you. Especially when I’ve now got my umpteenth blog stalker slamming me with trackbacks and shouting about how similar I am to Dan Rather because I don’t link to and accept a post randomly swearing at me because I have the audacity to have comment registration. Every day. Every day, some new asshole climbs out of bed and decides to take a swipe. And you simply can’t fight it, or reason with it all. Especially because so many of the arguments are dissonant. Why do you think people like Michael Moore are so popular?
And when you ignore them they either go away or stalk you.
All I can say is walk a mile in my shoes, and see how touchy it makes you. Though some others with larger audiences would and do handle it better, I’m positive.
My key problem (besides sensitivity, cooincidentally helpful in decent blogging), is the fact that I still try to maintain active communication and openness on my blog, instead of closing the doors to trackbacks and comments like Instapundit, Sullivan, Powerline (comments), Malkin, etc. There’s a reason they do this.
And hence the site becomes a showcase for everyone’s opinion, no matter how nasty or pointless, and any move to edit the content linked to or featured on my site is labeled as “oppression,” and leads to an inevitable direct analogy to Dan Rather. Becuase people like simple, ironic narratives, and what’s more appropos or ironic than comparing me to the guy I criticized?
That’s almost why I feel sympathy for the old coot, because there’s no doubt that he’s had to put up with loads of shit that were unfair, in addition to the criticism that was legitimate. As a result, he probably didn’t know which way was up or down after thirty years. I’ve only been popular for 4-5 months, and I’m already burnt out from the “feedback.” It’s unnatural to take a daily flogging, internet or no. One needs thick skin and a tin ear.
Dan (in the comment above) and I had a scuffle because of a misperception dependent on the curtness of one of my responses while answering one of my 200 daily e-mails before the election. I should have just ignored the e-mail. I learned a lesson.
Rightwingsparkle -
Like many people that enter into blogging, you assume a relationship with people that’s too forward and personal. My initial addition of you to the blog roll was in response to your active commenting on my site, and contrary to what you might think, in spite of your brazen e-mailing repeatedly asking for placement. This is not typically done; it’s sort of bad manners. I have NEVER e-mailed anyone multiple times asking to be on their blogroll. I’d be ashamed to ask more than once, because chances are they diodnt like my site the first time I asked unsuccessfuly.
I subsequently removed you from the blogroll because on one of my rare visits to your blog, I discovered that I wasn’t on your blogroll. And this is also amazing hubris, to ask bloggers with traffic to link your new brand new blog before you even have them on the roll. I beg you – please start e-mailing Glenn Reynolds and begging for a spot on his roll. It doesn’t usually work. There’s a reason: 100 people a day probably do it.
Once you explained and remedied the problem, I was going to re-blogroll you, but two things happened:
1. When I didn’t get around to it fast enough, you reminded me several times, and in the public comments section of my blog. Recently you did it again. I just don’t enjoy this type of interaction or pressure; you aren’t owed anything.
2. And I ignored it because of one other reason: I took more time to read your site, and I hate saying this publicly, and it’s only because you’ve insisted on playing corner girlfriend gossip corner, again, in the public comments section of another blog, but …
I may think you’re a perfectly nice person, and you’ve been nice in comments, <style. I dont like the content. I don’t really like the writing. I can’t stand the color. I also don’t like the pushy way that you beg for linkage, and I <b>REALLY</b> don’t like the way you complain about it publicly, when I’m really trying to be polite and ignore you, instead of telling you that I don’t like your blog. Something tells me that you didn’t take hints very well.
Others obviously liek your site, and that’s great, but it’s just not my style. I never should have added you in the first place.
Do you really want to be on a blogroll because you guilted or badgered someone into it? Or because of pity? No. So move on.
Is that “touchy?” I really don’t like to be impolite, but this really forces my hand, no?
So there it is. Another hurt enemy on this list, because I’m so evil. After trying to give someone a hint by ignoring them and not having to outright tell them that I dislike the quality of their work.
Ain’t blogging grand? And for the people that don’t have these daily problems, as yourself – why? This is why bloggers like Den Beste quit. It’s why many writers that grow a certain blogging audience withdraw from comments or trackbacks – because theres someone who wants something or wants to take a nasty shot at you every day.
It’s tiring, so one needs to learn how to ignore. I haven’t quite figured that part out yet.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 5:02 am #
Oh and Rightwingsparkle -
But it just so happened that he was requesting those interested in being blogrolled when I commented that I would like him to.
I also subsequently took the offer back and apologized because I misjudged the volume. You even commented in the wrong thread, I believe. Your requests were repeated and aggressive. Bad manners.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 5:06 am #
“On another level, sure: it’s bad form to be rude to those who treat you well. But assuming for a second that we all know that, then why do we do it anyway? And is the advice Brokaw offered sound advice?”
Some of us do NOT do it anyway. Why be rude to those who support you? I have never seen you do it, although perhaps you have in the past. I just know that I myself find it hard to be rude to anyone. In fact, in some e-mails I have received that were rude,because I responded in a positive manner I was able to have very interesting discussions with people I might have otherwise dismissed.
I think Brokaw’s advice is not sound. I think anyone who does his job needs to listen to the critics. Perhaps if Dan had listened to how partisan he had become he would have been able to leave with dignity instead of humilation.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 5:08 am #
RWS-
Oops. Before “I can’t stand the color,” I had I don’t like the content, but accidentally deleted it.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 5:13 am #
Bill, my requests were repeated and agressive??
I believe I joked about it on your blog perhaps twice. And my e-mail was even joking.
Agressive? oh come on.
I’m sorry you feel that way. I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings, I was just commenting on Jeff’s take and your feelings in your post with my experience with you.
Comment by Jeff Goldstein on 12/1 @ 5:18 am #
“Some of us do NOT do it anyway. Why be rude to those who support you?”
I think the point Brokaw is making is don’t obsess about every piece of criticism, or it will end up driving you mad—to the point where you see attacks where there weren’t attacks.
But I take your point.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 5:29 am #
Bill, you have no “hurt enemy” here.
When I started blogging I did ask some to check out my site and blogroll me if they liked it. I didn’t know that was “bad form.” Anyway, just telling me no would have been fine.
I did not “repeatedly e-mail” you. I only e-mailed when you asked not to comment about it on your blog. I don’t even remember e-mailing you to ask you to but once. The only other time was to let you know why I hadn’t added you and then to let you know when I had. I hardly call that “brazen.”
Am I the only one discussing you here? Why am I the “corner gossip girl?’
I don’t think I started this.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 5:35 am #
Agressive?
Asking to be on someone’s blogroll more than once is aggressive. Three times is kind of odd. Then bugging them about it on completely unrelated comment threads goes farther. Even once. I realize that you consider the interaction light, like joking with your friends down at the pool hall, or whatever – but it’s not really my style.
It’s uncomfortable for the person that doesn’t want to link your blog because they just don’t really dig it. Doubly uncomfortable in public, no?
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 5:35 am #
One more little thing Bill, if your trying to teach me about taking criticism and being hurt by it, even my meanest troll couldn’t have done a better job.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 5:42 am #
I did not “repeatedly e-mail†you.
Yes you did. Twice initially. Then a third time explaining why you weren’t on the roll. And then at least two (perhaps three) more comments bugging me. I can certainly dig them up.
I addressed the other person that referenced me. But you will keep harping this point about teh blogroll, in public, until it’s all out in the open.
I’m not going to blogroll your site. I’m sorry, but I don’t enjoy it and I don’t like the manner in which you push it. I know you’ve been nice to me on my site, and you are a perfectly nice person, but I can’t blogroll everyone that has supported the site. It’s just not feasible.
I tried to ignore but you won’t let it go.
Can we now proceed to drop this and go about our business? Do you have the answers you need?
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 5:50 am #
if your trying to teach me about taking criticism and being hurt by it, even my meanest troll couldn’t have done a better job.
Ask yourself who pushed the issue. This is not pleasant for me in any way.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 6:04 am #
Yeah, Bill, I think I got the whole “you don’t like my site thing” since you have said it now about 4 times.
The answers I need? I didn’t ask anything. But maybe I will now.
“Dan (in the comment above) and I had a scuffle because of a misperception dependent on the curtness of one of my responses while answering one of my 200 daily e-mails before the election.”
For someone with 200 daily e-mails, it is amazing to me that you seem to remember the EXACT number of e-mails you got from me. I don’t even remember the e-mails that well. Why are insisting on continuing to be mean? I said fine.
“<style.” </i>
I think it is obvious what your style is. I am just wondering why you would be this way with someone whe merely (and jokingly) said you were touchy.
Comment by jmflynny on 12/1 @ 6:04 am #
I started checking out Bill’s site several months ago, prior to the Rathergate scandal, and he immediately became one of my must-reads. Why? Because he always makes an attempt at fairness. He always tries to show empathy for the other guys. I was impressed by his humility (especially during the Rathergate scandal), and his willingness to address, head-on, those who disagreed..not in an attempt to humiliate, but to debate, reasonably, their differences. He is what I would refer to as a gentlemen-blogger.
The fact that he has maintained his generous demeanor, in the face of the nastiness he has encountered, surprises me.
I would, certainly, have told the jerks (and not as cleverly as Jeff has) to take a leap.
Bill, and Jeff, keep up the good work.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 6:06 am #
<style.” </i>
That quote was suppose to go where it says <style.” up there, just so it makes sense…
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 6:10 am #
Ok, lets try again. Here’s Bill’s Quote
“I realize that you consider the interaction light, like joking with your friends down at the pool hall, or whatever – but it’s not really my style.”
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 6:25 am #
I think I am beginning to understand the nastiness he encountered.
Comment by Bill from INDC on 12/1 @ 6:42 am #
For someone with 200 daily e-mails, it is amazing to me that you seem to remember the EXACT number of e-mails you got from me.
I have an excellent memory. Too good, really.
Joking, eh? Do you really want to continue this? The whole point is, this is a complaint that you insist on airing publicly, repeatedly, now on other sites, so we’re going to air it out until you are satisfied. Are you satisfied yet or can this be dropped?
Comment by chris on 12/1 @ 6:46 am #
The emphasis was on THAT. Not suggesting that there was no merit. Certainly not. Besides, I was referring more to how much I agreed with you, not how well you write or anything. And it wasn’t online, but I got into a big debate and I was defending you. Politically too, not just generally.
…no one knows what i’m talking about, huh…
Well I still feel better saying it.
Comment by ultraloser on 12/1 @ 7:28 am #
Glad the blogosphere dislodged the MSM.
But now, welcome to Blog Farm, where some bloggers apparently are more equal than others. Or their readers. Especially their readers.
Jesus.
Comment by Rightwingsparkle on 12/1 @ 7:38 am #
Bill, you seem to be the one who cannot drop it. After I told you I was sorry if I hurt your feelings you felt a need to rant for quite a few paragraphs about me and unfairly in my opinion. I was merely defending myself. You, sir, have merely been mean.
Now we can drop it.
Comment by Hayseed Janitor Straight Out of Central Casting on 12/1 @ 8:27 am #
Don’t mind me folks . . . dispatch jes sent me down heah to mop up the blood an’ the bile an’ the clumps o’ torn out hair an’ the self-righteous bloviatin’ bullshit . . . . .
GOTT DAYAMMMMMMMM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I LOOOOOOOVVVVE A CATFIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[wanders off scratching crotch, whistling a dirge, mop trailing a little blood . . . ]
Comment by Dan on 12/1 @ 9:05 am #
Damn, I clicked off the email comments by mistake. Maybe not a bad thing but I want to make one thing very clear. The reason why I posted what I did was in Bill’s defense – ie we had a squabble and it was resolved and he was open, honest and a gentleman for and in doing his part to make that so.
He does excellent work on his blog and if anyone doesn’t like it or him they should find another place to read, comment, whatever. It’s HIS damn blog just as everyone’s is. And if the “meanest” thing you ever have to deal with in life is an unfortunate internet exchange, consider yourself freakin blessed and get over it.
Comment by SophieZ on 12/1 @ 4:02 pm #
So Jeff asked: Is the advice Brokaw offered sound advice?
I say “yes”. I happen to be a prosecutor in Texas. In the county that has sent more people to death row than any other state/nation. We take major flack. The local media hate us. If we listened to the screeching liberals, we’d all go nuts. If you constantly try to defend yourself from irrational criticism, you start to sound disengenuous. The only way we can do our job is to do what we know is the right thing, then keep our collective heads down and dodge the shrapnel.
Comment by NukemHill on 12/1 @ 9:56 pm #
Methinks there is a difference between “being sensitive” and “being full of one’s self.”
Just sayin’.
Comment by Fred on 2/9 @ 5:09 am #
AS A CITIZEN FREELOADING BLOG READER WITH NO DOG IN THIS FIGHT WHATSOEVER, I DEMAND THAT THE LUDICROUS AND JUVENILE BLOG HAIR PULLING AND BITCH SLAPPING CONTINE FOR MY IMMENSE AMUSEMENT!