Tinker Tailor Soldier Blogger

So it’s my fault as a leftist who thinks soooo many bad and evil thoughts about the right that I believe somebody like Bob really means what he say? Okay. But that doesn’t answer the original Q though, if he really doesn’t mean it, does it make it okay for him to say these things? It’s the internet after all, how are we supposed to decipher intent?

JK-

The reason we take it somewhat seriously is because we presume that this is a space for relatively serious conversation.  Trolls ought to be chased out.  Bob’s presence has been repeatedly defended by many.  Which means even when those same people are saying, “He’s harmless because there is nothing serious to his comments,” they are also communicating, “But there is enough merit there to allow his posts to stand.”  You can’t have it both ways.  Either Bob is a troll who ought to go or he should be taken seriously and taken to task when he says seriously offensive things.

SW-

Considering the powers that be have taken up slings and arrows against others, why draw the line here?  What makes Bob different?  I have asked this on several occasions and always get the same responses: he doesn’t really mean it; he dresses his nonsense up just nice enough to slip by; booting him means we hate conservatives.

I’m sorry, EK, but you’ll need to do better than that to justify the treatment he receives.  Especially when he so egregiously blows that line out of the water, as he did here.

DD is someone who I would say expertly walks a fine line.  And DD makes meaningful contributions that further conversation in his own, unique, line-walking way.  (DD, please read this as a compliment!  I don’t always agree with you, but even when I know you are taking a deliberately provacative tact, I am always given pause and saying, “He DOES at least sort of have a point!”)

Bob is a troll plain and simple.

SW-

But who are his kind?  Trolls?  If Bob really is a troll, than he adds NOTHING to the conversation.

If he represents a world view that he himself possesses, than there is a place for that here.  But if he has made himself a caricature of a viewpoint that is not well represented here, than he ultimately detracts from conversation.

Great points, Rufus.  I’m not necessarily calling for an out-and-out ban.  I don’t know that I’ve ever called for that.  But I do think a response is appropriate.  There is a lot of mileage between a ban and carte blanche.  If there is something positive I can say about Bob, it’s that there appears to be a high degree of intellect behind what he does.  He’s not some ESPN.com commenter who’s great intellectual achievement is figuring out how to represent the N-word using the @ symbol and posting it 1,000 times to every article involving a black athlete.  I’m confident Bob could contribute meaningfuly.  If we can find a way to elicit this from him, I think we’d be richer for it.  How we do that, I don’t know.  Stick or carrot?

Stillwater,

I was more disturbed by the guy who was openly hitting on me.

Still, I would wager a lot of liberals would think twice about talking on a site that lets Bob post.

Like Jason said, I’m not sure that speaks well of liberals, frankly.

That’s a little too meta for me. If someone came to this site and said ‘black people just need to get back to the fields where they belong’, we’d have a collective uprising on our hands. Bob essentially says the equivalent about women.

Is it legitimate to be incensed at the former but not the latter? They seem strictly analogous to me. So accusing liberals of being overly sensitive about the expression of reprehensible views – even if they’re understood as trollery! – seems misplaced to me. It suggests that simply because someone says something to get a reaction you’re wrong to react, when what’s really in play here, it seems to me, is the expression of objectionable beliefs independently of their purpose.

I think everyone is overthinking this.

Bob is a classic troll.   90% of his postings are not participation in a conversation, but an attempt to derail one.   They are goads–he is simply trying to provoke a reaction from people.   And I’m astounded by his success.

I’m not for banning any ideological point of view, here.   I enjoy hearing from all quarters.   But what Bob was doing was just peeing in a public well.   If Bob wants to engage instead of poke, I’d be fine with it.   But what he was doing was simply trying to get a rise out of people for his own amusement.

Then interpret my comment as an independent contribution to the ongoing discussion. I mean, I really don’t know why those things you mention ought to matter in responding to what I wrote.

At this point the conversation is kind of moot though, yes?

Just saw this Tod, and you’re right. Not a very fair response. But I actually re-read the relevant comments and it seemed obvious to me (at the time) that I didn’t switch any cards: I was referring to liberals (not women) and I thought Rufus was referring to liberals reacting (not banning) objectionable commenters.

So I really couldn’t find the argument HE was making and uncharitably attributed it to gamesmanship. My bad.

“You’re forgetting the other option, which is that Bob really does represent the right — it’s trolls all the way down.”

An option? So, Jason, you believe that everyone on the Right is a troll? You have made quite a few disparaging remarks that can be taken personally by people who consider their political position to be on the Right. I don’t get it — is this what you really believe? Because, if there’s an option that you represent the Left, then it says something unfavorable about the Left.