Clue Number One:
The comments responding to the post are longer than the post itself. Any time
someone has to try to bolster his or her counter-argument by either over-explaining
or craploading, he or she has a weak case. Either that, or he or she has way
too much free time and needs to put down the Cheetos and Mountain Dew, turn off
the computer, and get out of the basement more often.
Clue Number Two:
Name calling. If a critic has to indulge in ad hominem attacks on the writer, whether it’s to refer to the writer as a rightwing nutjob or a bleeding
heart liberal, instead of addressing the substance of the post, that critic has
a problem. Regardless of whether or not the argument being made is sound, the
personal ideology of the writer is irrelevant. If you don’t agree with the
writer, point out the problems with the argument instead of being intellectually
lazy. Counter arguments lead to discussions and the possibility of finding
commonalities; name calling just builds walls.
Clue Number Three:
Comments pointing out the obvious while ignoring the actual content of the
post. “You used biased sources.” Well, duh. There’s no such thing as an
unbiased source, especially if a topic is at all controversial. What’s your
next stunning revelation going to be? Water is wet? Snow is cold?
Clue Number Four: Seizing
on a phrase or a sentence that has little or nothing to do with the actual
point of the post and attacking it like a starving weasel that’s just spotted a
particularly fat mouse. Either the commenter doesn’t have an effective counter
argument to propose, or he or she is lacking in reading comprehension. If the
writer begins by saying, for example, “I saw X recently and it reminded me of Y”
and then writes a post about Y but your comment is a lengthy crapload about X,
then you’re not paying attention. And you’re also way too sensitive about whatever
X might happen to be.
[h/t to Bad Tux for getting me thinking
about deconstructing craploaded comments. It’s never been a problem on this
blog, but it is in another place I write.]
I saw your post on Alexandria. I used to post there - one of the reasons I left was DADvocate - he got under my skin too much. You seem to be doing a better job of handling him.
ReplyDeleteLance, it's pretty clear that particular person has a distinct view of the world that isn't likely to change any time soon so I'm not going to worry about it.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually kind of looking forward to seeing if DADvocate tries to pick a fight every time I post. I'll be doing a book review soon -- is that going to be slammed because my perceived poltics make my response to the text flawed? Anyone who obsesses that much about fairly innocuous blog postings kind of proves my point about some people needing to put down the Cheetos and Mountain Dew and get out of their parents' basements more often.