This week I posted an article entitled “I am Extraordinary,” which turned out to be more controversial than I thought it would be. Most people who know me would understand that this is the exact sort of thing that would come out of my mouth. For those on the internet, well, if nothing else I’d expect them to take it in a more satirical light and have a good laugh. Don’t get me wrong: I was completely serious, but when someone says these sort of things, it’s hard not to get a good laugh at it. It’s kind of like Stephen Colbert: insofar as he’s making fun of Conservatives, he’s being completely serious, yet it’s funny and even the most zealous find him funny.
Being controversial, I got a lot a few comments via the blog but as well as Twitter and Facebook. My friend Elyse and David both seem to get this, but I got other comments from people who didn’t seem to. Here are two examples:
Tired of your bullshit — spamcollector2008@yahoo.com Masturbatory, largely false. Only the sheer magnitude of your arrogance (coupled, perhaps, with a total lack of self-awareness) is extraordinary. Please grow up soon.
da illest killa — powerman@yahoo.com I’m better looking than few. I’m smarter than uneducated loafs. I’m funnier than a pile of dead babies. I’m more driven than a gay guy’s b hole. I have vision, which the blind will never have. I’m immensely unhappy with myself, which most people aren’t.And this is just a sample of the other kinds of comments I got. I didn’t publish them because it violated my terms for commenting (which just really boils down to don’t be an idiot). But I wanted to use these as an example of how to be a bad member of the online community. If you want to respond to a controversial blog post, in either a positive or negative fashion, by all means do so. That’s the beauty of blogs: they’re an open media. However, do so without being vapid and incendiary; in short, don’t flame people because it doesn’t do anyone any good. Both of these people might have had legitimate claims—I’m not really sure the second one has a point—but they obfuscated it by proffering those inane comments. Instead, they should’ve posted a well-formulated response so that I could’ve engaged in a conversation with them. Seriously—I do have personality flaws and I would at least take an opportunity to have a discussion, but not with them. Basically, as long as you offer good comments, you’ll be a happy member of the online community and you’ll get the respect you want. If you don’t have the volition to make your comment publicly with your own name and email address, then it’s probably not worth your time to even write it. Go comment on Youtube if you want to make a fool of yourself.
Although there are a lot of people who know you’re pretty arrogant, there are still more people who know that you’re kidding and are really a good kid. Which is really worse, being slightly arrogant, or not having the gall to say something to somebody personally(or with a real name rather)?
I’ll definitely go with that latter.
You need to grow a pair and stop only allowing comments that suit your interests.
It’s not that those didn’t suit my interests, Matt. It’s that they added nothing to the conversation.
So the conversation being you proclaiming your ‘extraordinarity’, counter arguments add nothing while joking remarks are kept. Noted.
“Both of these people might have had legitimate claims, but they obfuscated them by proffering those inane comments. Instead, they should’ve posted a well-formulated response so that I could’ve engaged in a conversation with them.” (Edited for grammatical errors)
I would like to make it clear that I do, in fact, have legitimate claims. I felt I stated them in no uncertain terms, but if you feel that an explanation or a rephrasing is necessary, I will gladly oblige. I claimed that your post was masturbatory in that its sole purpose, in my opinion, was to stroke an over-inflated ego. I also stated that the sheer magnitude of your ego was extraordinary. By this, I meant that you are extraordinarily conceited, arrogant, megalomaniacal, etc. (If this is unclear, I can offer more synonyms at some later time.) These claims are legitimized by your posting on your own blog a list of ways in which you are superior to most.
Do you know what the verb to obfuscate and the word “inane” mean, respectively? I’ll help you out.
obfuscate 1 a: darken b: to make obscure 2: confuse
My comment obfuscated nothing. I did not confuse the reader. My opinion of you was apparent. If not, I offer my sincerest apologies to you, your readers, and the internet, generally.
inane 1 : empty, insubstantial 2 : lacking significance, meaning, or point : silly
Was my comment really inane? Did I lack a point? Were my claims unsubstantiated?
You claimed that you “didn’t publish [my comment] because it violated [your] terms for commenting (which just really boils down to don’t be an idiot).” You’re insinuating here that I’m an idiot. I may not be smarter than most, but I’m certainly no idiot.
I only hope that this comment meets the bar for excellence, that you consider it the “well-formulated” writings of an individual who is not an idiot.
Well, I certainly feel that this is a better response, but it still violates one very important axiom: Use your own name. It’s such a cheap shot to use pseudonym such as “Still Tired.”
And I don’t think my post was masturbatory. Maybe my ego is inflated, but I think over-inflated is an exaggeration. More importantly, you are taking this completely out of context. The point wasn’t to stroke my ego, but to prove that claiming to be extraordinary isn’t that ridiculous—and it’s not.
The main problem with you is that you clearly have personal issues with me. I don’t know who you are—aside that you’re posting somewhere in Tennessee, but I surmise that I know you from high school and that I offended you in some way. And if I did: get over it. Stop living in the past and hiding under pseudonyms and face your problems.
This was never about you, so please stop making it that way. Also—please reread this post and learn from the precepts that I established.
Learn from the precepts you established? Face my problems?
Who do you think you are, Logan? It seems with each passing day you become more full of yourself. You can be a really nice guy, but you build up this wall of egotistical bullshit to keep people from hurting your feelings. It’s stupid and tiresome.
I wrote under a pseudonym because it didn’t matter who I was. The fact is that several people feel the same way (do you remember high school?). I’m not one guy with personal problems. I’m just one guy willing to call your bluff.
“This was never about you, so please stop making it that way.” Really? Stop obfuscating the readers. You quoted me in your post.
Please grow up soon.
And thanks for your comment, Matt. If you hadn’t said something, my second comment may have never been allowed. After all, I submitted the post yesterday. I guess it took around twelve hours to grow said pair.
I never expected that to be you, Jared.
First, I must say, I love people who use the internet and what they think is their intellect to hide behind a shield of flowery writing and grammar to attack people.
Secondly, I know Logan, and I also know that Logan is hilarious. That’s why his post about him being extraordinary was taken for exactly what it was. A joke. I even hassled him for it.
Third, This is Logan’s Blog. I’ll repeat in case it’s unclear. THIS IS HIS BLOG. He can post whatever he wants on it, and allow whatever he wants on it, and also censor whatever the hell he chooses. If you don’t like it, stay away.
All that being said. Logan…You are extraordinary and don’t you forget it. Seems like you have some pretty base friends who can’t tell a joke when it’s sitting on their face.