The Volokh Conspiracy

"Local Idiot to Post Comment on Internet":
From the Onion. Thanks to blm28 for the link.
Allen G:
FIRST POST!!!!!!!!!111
8.7.2008 11:10pm
Observer:
I have long wondered why there are no "First" or "Gay" comments on Volokh as with virtually every other site on the Internet. Is it that Volokh does a great job of deleting these comments immediately or that the sort of people who leave these comments just don't read Volokh?
8.7.2008 11:37pm
Dell Adams:
Ninja'd!
8.7.2008 11:39pm
Mike BUSL07 (mail):
This is so TTT
8.7.2008 11:44pm
OrinKerr:
Observer,

I don't recall seeing that; Even though our threads are only lightly moderated, a bit of moderation goes a long way. Plus, I would just delete the comment if someone posted something like that. (Except when it is part of the joke, as above.)
8.7.2008 11:49pm
John Armstrong (mail) (www):
I think it's self-selecting. Those who would be inclined to write something like that just don't have what it takes to read a VC post.
8.8.2008 12:01am
Fub:
Allen G wrote at 8.7.2008 11:10pm:
FIRST POST!!!!!!!!!111
I'm sorry, but the Idiolympics Commmittee rulz sez "!!!!!!!!!111" is not a proper misplelle. Please try "FRIST POTS" or "FROST PIST" and re-enter your comment.
8.8.2008 12:29am
Jim Anderson (www):
Blurst!

Damn.
8.8.2008 12:30am
wuzzagrunt (mail):
"What better way to take advantage of this incredible technology than to log onto the Internet and insult a complete stranger?"

+1

We are blessed to live in such an age.
8.8.2008 1:01am
anon.:
I'm sorry, but the Idiolympics Commmittee rulz sez "!!!!!!!!!111" is not a proper misplelle. Please try "FRIST POTS" or "FROST PIST" and re-enter your comment.

+1
8.8.2008 1:02am
Hoosier:
"I'm sorry, but the Idiolympics Commmittee rulz sez "!!!!!!!!!111" is not a proper misplelle. Please try "FRIST POTS" or "FROST PIST" and re-enter your comment."

Ha! pwned teh d-bg!
8.8.2008 1:16am
David Warner:
"I think it's self-selecting. Those who would be inclined to write something like that just don't have what it takes to read a VC post."

Agreed. Our idiocies are more esoteric.
8.8.2008 1:58am
Kazinski:
How did they know I was local?
8.8.2008 2:00am
Modus Ponens:
I had thought the preferred term on this blog was "co-conspirators."
8.8.2008 4:42am
Positroll:
How come the Onion doesn't mention trolls even once?
I feel disrespected ... :-(
8.8.2008 4:46am
Hoosier:
It's 'The Onion'. Shouldn't that read "AREA idiot . . ."?
8.8.2008 6:36am
Jim at FSU (mail):
This blog is pretty much the essence of teal deer. There's not much of interest to the first post/goatse linker/etc to get them here in the first place to form an ad hoc community of competing trolls.

I think a lot of trolling takes place here, but it is a more sophisticated variety that is less amenable to reflexive banning.
8.8.2008 7:27am
I am concerned (mail):
I think a lot of trolling takes place here, but it is a more sophisticated variety that is less amenable to reflexive banning.

Not to start a debate on the vagaries of trolling, but if trolling here requires intellectual sophistication and plausible deniability to pass muster, then that might explain why there is so little trolling here or it might simply mean that everyone here is a troll.
8.8.2008 7:42am
bornyesterday (mail) (www):
In Soviet Russia, our new anonymous internet forum and blog commenter overlords welcome you!
8.8.2008 8:47am
sachin (mail) (www):
really an idiot.....oh yes
8.8.2008 8:47am
darelf:
I think "i am concerned" is on to us....

my problem here is that it's hard to tell sometimes whether someone is being sarcastic... even when rereading my own comments...
8.8.2008 8:57am
FantasiaWHT:
Related, what do you think of this?

Liberal blogs more profane than conservative ones

(VC is mentioned)
8.8.2008 9:00am
Houston Lawyer:
Apparently, as of today, the Onion's website is blocked on my firn's system as sexually related.
8.8.2008 9:33am
Virginian:
Am I the only one who clicked on this to see what Sarcastro is saying now?
8.8.2008 9:35am
Sarcastro (www):
Hey now, Virginian, I've always considered myself more a cretin than a simple idiot.
8.8.2008 10:05am
Sarcastro (www):
FantasiaWHT I think it's because liberals aren't as in touch with the English language as conservatives.

That and they are always so emotional and take things personally. Conservatives are always cerebral and take a broader perspective.

That or Conservatives moderate the crap out of their comments so they can crow about being so classy.

Present company excluded, of course. Prawfblog means less swearing anyhow.
8.8.2008 10:08am
Hoosier:
Sarcasrto--I NEED an awnswer, buddy!

Are you a fan ot The Tick, or is the name just a coincidence?

Headline: 'Area Hoosier, "Big Tick Fan," Wastes Office Time on Net'
8.8.2008 10:34am
Brandon Mylenek:
SOOO GAY!
8.8.2008 10:35am
Q the Enchanter (mail) (www):

"Related, what do you think of this?

Liberal blogs more profane than conservative ones "



I think 'Matthew Sheffield' must be Mylenek's nom de plume.
8.8.2008 10:41am
Sarcastro (www):
[Hoosier I do love me some Tick, both cartoon and live action. When I was thinking of names, "Sacrastrophe" seemed a bit unweildy, "Satyricon" has kind of a history, and "This is Parody" was too postmodern]
8.8.2008 10:48am
Dave N (mail):
Sarcastro,

I always thought you chose the name because you wanted to show your affinity for those fun loving guys who run Cuba.
8.8.2008 10:53am
Sarcastro (www):
Dave N showin' how much I love Communisim was just a bonus.
8.8.2008 10:56am
roy (mail):
This is exactly why we can't let Barack Hussein Obama into the White House.
8.8.2008 11:29am
Ex parte McCardle:
LOL!!!! <3!!!!
8.8.2008 11:29am
Hoosier:
Sarcastro--So . . . do you now ADMIT that sarcasm is NOT A SUPER-POWER?
8.8.2008 12:19pm
Hoosier:
BTW--My favorite episode:

www.thetick.ws/car16.html

ROTFLMAO! TTYL!
8.8.2008 12:21pm
Sarcastro (www):
Hoosier yeah, right!

For me, it's

http://www.thetick.ws/car27.php
or
http://www.thetick.ws/car20.php


OMGWTFBBQ!
8.8.2008 12:30pm
Christopher Hagar:
Liberals blogs may be more profane because they have younger commenters.

There seems to be relatively little social phenomena attracting masses of young people to congregate as conservatives.
8.8.2008 12:45pm
CJColucci:
Re: political distribution of profane comments -- WGAFF!
8.8.2008 12:53pm
Hoosier:
Sarcastro--Would the Ottoman Empress be able to control Chairface Chippendale?
8.8.2008 1:05pm
CCM:
pwned
8.8.2008 1:08pm
Sarcastro (www):
Hoosier now THAT would have been a pretty awesome matchup. Too bad the Ottoman Empress met her end in The World's Most Comfortable Chair
8.8.2008 1:10pm
Feminist Avenger (mail):
Sarcastro is dominating this thread with his male privilege. He should pay more attention to the needs and concerns of women and read about feminism all day long. His sense of humor is really just verbal violence that perpetuates patriarchal norms and furthers the socialization of his listeners into adherents of gender constructs that promote a culture of rape. He should be castrated.
8.8.2008 1:19pm
JosephSlater (mail):
Thief's link is brilliant.
8.8.2008 1:37pm
krs:
Thanks, Thief.
8.8.2008 1:43pm
Go Bears:
TEH GHEY
8.8.2008 3:24pm
Dave N (mail):
I think Sarcastro may have met his match in Feminist Avenger.
8.8.2008 3:45pm
TomH (mail):
Then he could be Castrato, no?
8.8.2008 4:05pm
Sarcastro (www):
[Yep, Feminist Avenger served up some pretty good satire there.

Got nothin' to say back. It was quality.]
8.8.2008 4:54pm
Hoosier:

Feminist Avenger, so-called, did not use the words "normativity," phallogocentrism," or "hegemonic."

I call shenanigans!
8.8.2008 5:39pm
LM (mail):
Hoosier and Sarcastro: I'm sure this will somehow prove I'm both elitest and shallow, but the only Tick that got its pincers into me was Patrick Warburton's.
8.8.2008 5:51pm
wuzzagrunt (mail):
Judging by the syntax and choice of wording, I'd swear that Feminist Avenger is my eldest sister. Is that you Florence?

BTW, if I am correct, then it was not satire.
8.8.2008 6:10pm
Hoosier:
LM: " prove I'm . . . elitest"

"elite" "eliter" "elitest"


Quite a claim there, LM. You must have gone to HLS. And been on law review.
8.8.2008 6:31pm
Dave N (mail):
wuzzagrunt,

Is your sister's email address "hairyobese@feministing.com"? Because if itis, you are right, it isn't satire then.
8.8.2008 7:09pm
Dave N (mail):
Hoosier,
Quite a claim there, LM. You must have gone to HLS. And been on law review.
But did he publish?
8.8.2008 7:16pm
LM (mail):

You must have gone to HLS. And been on law review.

Obviously not. Otherwise, wouldn't my dearth of intelligence and talent make me god-like to all us clueless liberals who still can't figure out what makes George Bush such a totally qualified (and cool) president?

And gods don't make typos.
8.8.2008 7:23pm
LM (mail):
... or maybe they have better spell-check.
8.8.2008 7:26pm
Katl L (mail):
Libertarians, not conservative btw, dont follow goodwin law.
8.8.2008 10:37pm
Randy R. (mail):
"SOOO GAY!"

I'm going to sue you and Prof. Volokh for hurting my feelings. Hopefully, I can shut this blog down until you realize I have feelings too!
8.9.2008 11:28am
Hoosier:
Randy R.:

As Sarah Silverman said: 'Oh! I'm so sorry. I didn't mean "gay" as in "gay." I meant "gay" as in "totally stupid".'

I'm glad she clarified that before anyone was offended!
8.9.2008 11:57am
Mike McDougal (mail):
I am disappointed by the lack of ratings of 180.
8.10.2008 3:57pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

[Important Note to Helpful Readers: If we have confusing typos and especially ugly formatting errors, such as an unclosed underline or bold tag, we'd love to hear from you about them -- but please e-mail the author about this, rather than leaving a comment. We often won't read the comments for a while after the post, and if there's a glaring formatting error, we'd see it quickly when we revisit the post, even without the comment; and in any event the comment likely isn't going to be that helpful to your fellow comment readers. So please e-mail us directly about glitches like this. Thanks!]

Comment Policy: We'd like the posts to be civil, of course (no profanity, personal insults, and the like), but we're also hoping that people try to be as calm, reasoned, and substantive as possible. So please, also avoid rants, invective, substantial and repeated exaggeration, and radical departures from the topic of the thread. Sticking with substance -- and staying on-topic -- will make the comments more helpful to other readers, and more pleasant.

As editors, we reserve the right to delete posts, and even to kick out posters, though we hope that both of these will be exceptional events. (We also reserve the right to be busy with other things, and therefore (1) not remove all the posts that might merit removal, and (2) ignore demands such as "You should remove A's posts, because they're just as bad as B's!")

Here's a tip: Reread your post, and think of what people would think if you said this over dinner. If you think people would view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who vastly overdoes it on the hyperbole, rewrite your post before hitting enter.

And if you think this is the other people's fault -- you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, but fools wrongly view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who overdoes it on the hyperbole -- then you should still rewrite your post before hitting enter. After all, if you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, then surely it's especially important that you frame your arguments in a way that is persuasive and as unalienating as possible, even to fools.

Our goal is to provide an interesting and pleasant environment that can help inform readers. To do that, we'll occasionally have to exercise our editorial discretion. Think of this as an in-person discussion group, where having different voices is critical to a great conversation -- but where sometimes the leader has to deal with cranks who sour the conversation more than they enliven it.

Naturally, there's always a risk that this discretion will be used erroneously, no matter how well-intentioned the editor. But discussion groups (especially on the Internet, but also off it) generally need an editor who'll occasionally make such judgments.

And, remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.