INTERNET IS SERIOUS BUSINESS
PART 3: TRIGGUR (Kevin Kelm)

I've dealt with Triggur's histrionics before, but this little tantrum of his took the cake. Let's dismantle his response a piece at a time:

You take this crap so seriously that you, personally, Xydexx Squeakypn0y, really are, let's say,... 40% of the reason they attack furries in general.

What I'm getting from this is that Triggur doesn't think violence against Something Awful Goons is anything that needs to be taken seriously. I'd disagree that I take this personally; my standard response is an exhausted sigh and an eyeroll. Like the oft-parroted claim that we cry "FURSECUTION", the alleged reaction exists more in their minds than in reality.

Because you've appointed yourself Herr Generale Leader In The Crusade Fighting Against The Bad Guys What Tease Furries and you're always the first one leading the charge, you're the one shrieking loudest when there's some kind of attack. You're the one champing indignantly publically calling them names like immature little boys and so on. I don't necessarily disagree, but your ongoing outrage is why it's so much fun for them.

I haven't appointed myself any such thing. I'm just a dude expressing his opinions on the internet like anyone else. My opinion is that these guys aren't funny and need to get new material. Apparently they, like Triggur, go into shrieking fits of rage and take it personally if someone doesn't find their lame jokes funny.

And I'm totally justified in calling them immature little kiddies: I've been around long enough to know more than half of them still live with their parents; one of them even had his computer priveleges taken away because he was spending too much time making snarky comments about me on the internets instead of concentrating on his schoolwork. How's that for comedy gold?

I mean really, you're on record saying you think they need to be rounded up and beaten.

It's called hyperbole—a rhetorical device in which statements are exaggerated. Hyperbole is used to evoke strong feelings or to create a strong impression, but is not meant to be taken literally. Anyone who takes that statement literally (especially after Squnq admitted he was putting his own spin on it) is gullible and stupid.

The fact of the matter is, I have a long history of opposing violence at Furry conventions. And all anyone ever needs to do to find that out is ask me. Despite Triggur's delusions that I've got some sort of vendetta against Goons, I'm actually quite approachable.

"Ignore them and they'll go away?" Actually, yes. Eventually. Not immediately. But if YOU stopped caring what they thought and just did your thing and didn't turn every attack into a big deal, yes, they WOULD eventually go away. Moreover, it wouldn't actually matter whether they stopped or not, because-- by definition-- you wouldn't actually care.

It has been demonstrated that ignoring asshats only makes them try harder to get a reaction, because that's what they want. It has also been demonstrated the only way to deal with asshats is not to ignore them but to give them a taste of their own medicine, measure for measure. The downside is that means stooping to their level, and I'm generally too nice or too busy to bother. In reality, "ignore them and they'll go away" means "don't respond to people who love to dish it out but can't take it." The bottom line is these guys are cowards who couldn't argue their way out of a wet paper bag.

Now, you can't assert that the people who say "ignore them and they'll go away" are lying, because at no point in the intervening time has the fandom (yourself included), actually tried it.

Ahhh, but they, and Triggur, are in fact lying. See, the gaping flaw in Triggur's reasoning here is that he's claiming he's never seen me not respond. (HINT: The reason he's never seen me not respond is because I'm not responding.) It's as though Triggur were on a cruise ship made of fail, and he didn't believe there was an iceberg under the water because he couldn't see it. Kinda like this:

Fact is, I drop out of flamewars and ignore these asshats so frequently they've coined a term for it: Pulling a Xydexx. At the end of the day, when I've biked 40-something miles, gotten some exercise, taken some pictures, frightened the wildlife (RUN, BAMBI, RUN!!!), and am pretty damn happy with myself, all these internet kiddies have to show for it is some snarky little comments about the guy who GOES OUTSIDE. (Alas, I still haven't been able to come up with a witty response to their insults that boil down to "HA HA, YOU WENT OUTSIDE"—maybe I'll come up with one on my next bike ride.)

I'm not mad at these guys at all. I pity them.

In your own words, "let's face it nothing makes them totally lose their shit faster than OMG XYDEXX." You already know they're reacting primarily to you. You already know that your aggressive stance on the matter fuels them rather than dissuades them.

Except my "aggressive" stance consists of simply existing and doing my own thing. Nothing I do or don't do is going to fuel or dissuade them. They've never needed a reason to lose their shit over me (and half the time, like Triggur, they lose their shit over things I don't believe or haven't done).

The ironic thing is that for a bunch of people who claim to not take the internet seriously, they sure do freak out a lot when something doesn't fit in their little bubble of normalcy.

No matter how much you fantasize about it, you can't beat them up. No amount of angst or argument on your part is ever going to end it because the angst and argument are what they're after. You play... they win.

Trolls lose by default, so whether I "play" or not is irrelevant. It doesn't matter what they say, whether I react, or how much of a loser they think I am, because when they "play" all it does is show how desperate for my attention they are. So they lose.

For the record, my fantasies usually involve guys in inflatable rubber deer costumes. If these guys were smart enough, that might be a game they could actually win. (OTOH, that would involve them being more creative than parroting lame internet jokes from 2001, so I doubt it's gonna happen.)

 

BUT WAIT, THERE'RE MORE! Here's the part that shows Triggur really doesn't have a clue:

What is your stance? Did you or did you not say, "Which is why furries should stop reacting with fear and panic, and start reacting with blanket parties for goons to show up at furry cons. -:)" ?

See, this is a question Triggur probably should have asked before getting himself all worked into a froth and claiming I wanted to beat up Goons and calling me Herr Generale and such. But like I said, it's a litmus test. Anyone who takes Squnq's bullshit at face value instead of asking me directly is someone I'm better off not associating with. (REMINDER: This test never fails. Never.)

And seriously, if the little unicorn smiley face at the end of that sentence isn't a clue that I'm not being serious, I don't know what is.

Oh, wait... that's right... I take everything seriously. At least according to some people. -:)

If you're truly on the high road here, I know you're above that level of commentary. This issue can be discussed rationally without ad hominem attacks.

Someone who spent his whole first response calling me Herr Generale is in no position to complain about ad hominem attacks.

Someone who spent his whole first response screeching in impotent, misdirected rage about wholly-imagined vendettas is not someone who is going to discuss the issue rationally.

Be that as it may, all I said was that the only people who say I support violence against SA Goons are gullible and stupid. That's not ad hominem, that's the truth:

• gullible - easily duped or cheated. Triggur was duped into believing Squnq's claim that I wanted to beat up SA Goons. That's gullible.
• stupid - lacking intelligence. Triggur decided to shriek with rage about it all over his LiveJournal rather than man up and ask me about it. That's stupid.

 

I had pretty much written Triggur off after his ginormous dramatic temper tantrum. In November 2007, I heard through the grapevine he wanted to make amends, but my gut feeling was he was just trying to position himself better to stir up more drama. Especially since his request wasn't even directed at me.

Then in April 2008, I got an e-mail:

Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 08:00:29 -0600 
From: Kevin Kelm (kkelm@triggur.org) 
Subject: Xydexx 



I know we've had our differences and disagreements over the years.


I want to apologize for how I've carried myself in them.


--Triggur

Anyone who knows me knows nothing stops me in my tracks faster than an apology. I don't like making enemies and am quick to forgive people. Maybe too quick. I wrote back:

Apology accepted.

Be well.

--Xydexx

 

And after that, everything was fine.

 

 

Until Triggur flipped out again and had another ginormous dramatic temper tantrum. (On the bright side, I now know precisely what an apology from Triggur is worth.)

 

 

 

And I can also say with confidence that people who believe what trolls like Squnq have to say instead of asking me directly are the sort of people I don't need to associate with.

---