Wednesday, August 31, 2005

Why I love flamers

Why I Love Flamers

No offense, but praise and compliments bore me. I prefer critique, questions, even hateful attacks. And don't get me wrong: I am not a masochist, victim, or chump.

So, if I'm no chump, victim, or masochist, why on earth do I like flamers, people who attack me in comments or emails?

Here's why...

Flame Attacks are Better
Than Compliments

(1) Constant praise makes us pampered, grandiosely delusional about our supposed "greatness", spoiled, comfortable, soft, weak, lazy, self-obsessed, and arrogant.

(2) Flaming critiques keep us on our toes, disciplined, tougher, thick-skinned, stoic, spartan, continually improving, alert, discontented, innovative, and humble.

(3) Hateful remarks make us introspective, contemplative, progressive, erudite, and more sympathetic toward others who are unfairly attacked.

(4) Hurtful comments make us laugh, improve our own sarcasm skills, and show how stupid and vulgar our attackers are.

(5) Negative publicity is much better than no publicity at all. The best way to kill a book, movie, music recording, or blog is to ignore it and say nothing about it.

Example of Flames
and My Responses


--EXAMPLE #1--

FLAME (at "Celebrate Blog Day 2005"):

At Wednesday, August 31, 2005 4:51:22 PM, Lacey said...

Oh good lord your blog sucks balls. The layout looks like a monkey threw poop all over the place.


At Wednesday, August 31, 2005 5:52:18 PM, Steven Streight said...

Lacey: thank you for the compliments. I actually did hire a monkey, your mother, to do the layout.

And what MSM (mainstream media) organization do you work for?

--EXAMPLE #2--

(at "Nametag expert blog inspires"):

Monday, August 29, 2005 1:23:50 PM Steven Streight said...

NOTE re deleted comment:

Someone calling himself "Alex Marlin" posted a comment that I considered, then deleted.

It had comment spam type message along the generic lines of "Nice blog. Just cruising the web, looking for high quality blogs. Good job."

Then he left a URL to his site.

Folks, this is classic comment spam, even if he did not mean it that way.

Comment Spam:

(1) short, flattering, generic message

(2) URL to unknown blog or web site, which may be dangerous, like a Trojan, virus, or spyware/adware attaching site.

Sorry, Alex, but if you're a web builder, you need to learn about netiquette and how not to appear to be Comment Spam in your comment posting.


At Wednesday, August 31, 2005 4:52:41 PM Laceysaid...

What kind of loser responds to comment spam? Good lord steven get a life.


At Wednesday, August 31, 2005 5:58:51 PM Steven Streight said...

Lacey: I'm sorry that, since you're probably 13 years old, male, and a fart joker and Harry Potter worshipper, you don't understand what I'm doing here in my blogology blogs.

I explain and "respond to" comment spam to help my readers to deal with it, to identify it, and to prevent and frustrate it.

If you do nothing, if you let it sit in your blog, or ignore it, or just delete it, without telling your readers what's up, then your blog or whatever you think you have, is not user friendly.

But thanks for showing your lack of concern for readers.


If you feel you must express your appreciation for something I've said or done, go ahead. But don't be surprised if I merely acknowledge the kindness, but move quickly on to other topics or issues.

I'm not saying: "don't be nice to me". That would be self-inflicted savagery, self-mutilation via manipulating others to do the damage.

What I am saying is: "don't think I will feel bad or threatened or hurt by negative comments."

I actually get happy when I see vile, horrible remarks on my blogs, which doesn't happen nearly enough. I get excited, I feel peaceful, and I have no wish to retaliate. But I may say something comical, as a snappy comeback.

If I am truly indifferent, apathetic, unconcerned about negative comments, then why do I often reply in a sarcastic counter-attack? Not because I'm angry, but to show my beloved blog readers how to fight back.

I love combat.

But I prefer to defend, and not launch offensives. Defending means I just wait for an attack, then defend my ideas against assaults. To launch an offensive, which I do once in a while, means going to a lot of trouble to research a topic and prepare a combative, confrontational presentation for persuasive transformation.

Too much work involved in offensive combat. I prefer defense. It's a lot easier, simpler, and funnier.

So keep those ugly accusations rolling in, Lacey, and whoever else thinks they're man or woman enough to rise up against me.

Good luck. You'll need it. I wrote "the book" on flame fighting and blogocombat.

Check my archives for "Blog Asbestos" or "How to Extinguish Online Flames" or whatever I called it. I don't care.

[signed] Steven Streight aka Vaspers the Grate



dave said...


Do you ever worry that sometimes by responding to flamers you are simply fueling the fire?


steven edward streight said...

Dave: thank you for expressing what can be a legitimate concern.

I am a combat veteran of many types of online warfare. I don't gleefully relish ignorant flames, but I sometimes toy with my opponents.

Just watch what happens here.

See if by toying with them, the flames grow higher and spread wider. I doubt it. But after all the hard work I put into most of my blog posts, I think I deserve to have a little fun with my prey.

I feel sorry for any flamer who accidentally stumbles into my blogs. It won't go well for them. I think I've demonstrated that a few times, if one checks my archives.

Diplomacy is overdone in the blogosphere.

What the blog realm needs, IMHO, is more fighters, not more politers.