Leave a comment

Comments 23

liviapenn January 28 2009, 05:02:10 UTC

She seems to be trying to paint the whole situation as evil forces conspiring against her...

But least one person is still attempting to point out that she actually hasn't been a 100% perfect saintly victim of other people's bad behavior: There were some real discussions going on in the old thread... But I'm glad it's gone. Your post at the top that started it, while honestly anguished, was really unfair, and offputting to some goodhearted people.

Reply


ignazwisdom January 28 2009, 05:03:11 UTC
ETA: Sorry, I probably shouldn't insinuate mental illness in a discussion like this. What I mean is that I have no idea what she's talking about or what she thinks is happening. Can someone explain?

Reply

liviapenn January 28 2009, 05:09:38 UTC
She said something about how, previously on BoingBoing, someone had impersonated Will Shetterly to say annoying things, and now it's happening again (there's a troll journal, "willlshetterly" with three Ls, going around impersonating him saying dumb things, apparently.)

So, you know, *my* assumption is that yes, since this is the internet, WS/the Neilsens have probably made some irrational enemy who likes messing with them, and this troll or trolls is taking the opportunity of this debacle in order to fuss around and make things worse.

But *TNH's* assumption is that this whole debacle is somehow about secret sockpuppet trolls targeting them, using racism disingenuously to make them look bad or whatever.

I mean, this just doesn't make *any sense*, because the discussion was large and widespread and energetic for *days* before PNH even got involved, and he only even got involved by commenting on mac_stone's post, so unless *her post* was some sort of tiger trap... I don't even know. It really does seems kind of irrational.

Reply

ignazwisdom January 28 2009, 05:38:57 UTC
(Does someone really need to pretend to be Will Shetterly saying dumb things? I mean, doesn't Will Shetterly himself take care of doing that all on his own?)

Thanks for parsing that mess for me; I couldn't make heads or tails of it.

And I nearly burst a vein in my head reading the original post, so I didn't want to spend too long dwelling on this latest one.

Reply

zvi_likes_tv January 28 2009, 05:45:51 UTC
The comments made by the troll were only slightly crazier than the shit Shetterly says, but they were actually more out there, once I could figure out what happened. The troll got noticed for saying something about not seeing race making Shetterly the best anti-racist or something insane like that.

Reply


dharma_slut January 28 2009, 05:22:20 UTC
...because the internet means never having to say you're sorry!

Oh, my freaking god.

Reply


lavendertook January 28 2009, 05:30:32 UTC
And she knows ginnytonnick is arguing in bad faith because she can read minds now? This is also the poster to whom she pulled out her editor credentials and then told her she's "stupid" like a classist bullying fucker. And I know ginnytonnick. If tnh wanted to take her on in a battle of wits where she doesn't get to have her finger on the delete key, all my money is on ginnytonnick.

Reply

abydosangel January 28 2009, 05:34:17 UTC
Absolutely and I know how ginnytonick rolls. It wouldn't be pretty and everything Teresa deserves.

I am stunned at how much worse she's making this. I hadn't thought it possible and yet....

Now the excuse is that it was a marauding mass of trolls and sockpuppets - all for the sake of not addressing the fail of her flame-out.

Reply

la_vie_noire January 28 2009, 08:36:52 UTC
Oh, and I'm seeing some 'allies' saying that ginnytonnick was 'just overly emotional/didn't know how to control her emotions' or something like that.

Reply

juliansinger January 29 2009, 22:46:57 UTC
Well, as someone who said something very much like that, I'd appreciate it if you could also notice my followup comment in the same thread. (If you're indeed thinking of coffeeandink's post here.) 'Cuz I /do/ clarify some of what I meant, and some of what I said in my original comment was kinda dumb.

Reply


cofax7 January 28 2009, 05:38:18 UTC
Yeah, I just... sure, there are trolls out there, people who like to stir shit up.

That there are trolls does not mean that everyone they may happen to reply to, or even agree with, is in collusion with the trolls or otherwise arguing in bad faith.

Also, after two weeks of this discussion/imbroglio, most people who have been paying attention can pretty much tell the bad-faith arguers from the over-enthusiastic. (Well, except for Shetterly, who apparently falls in the middle somewhere.)

The fact of trolldom does not by itself validate tnh's argument, but I suspect that's where she's going with this.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up