Sometimes it's not easy to remember that key saying.

Sometimes you get hit with another slam from the "if you're not 100% with us, you're 100% against us" school of non-thought, and you really want to respond.

Until you remember that:

  • A response won't change anything; the jackass will continue being a jackass and cherry-picking what you write for stuff to attack.
  • If I'm to take Greg* at face value, any "attack" (response) to someone on that side of the political spectrum, no matter how extreme or misguided they are, is treated as an "attack" on everybody on that side--a remarkable worldview in its own right, but one that dissuades me
  • A real response would require linking to the braying, thus giving the jackass a much larger audience.

The moral is, as always:

Don't feed the trolls.


Don't feed the trolls.

The only way you can avoid feeding trolls is by saying nothing, and since what the trolls want is to silence you, if you stop feeding them, they win.

A pretty conundrum. No?

Not really.

You feed the trolls by responding to their cherry-picked attacks and other nonsense.

I have no intention of saying nothing (somehow, between Cites & Insights and Walt at Random, that's just not likely.
I also have no intention of avoiding topics that enable the trolls to choose one or two sentences out of a multi-thousand-word article to use for their own twisted logic.

But I have consciously decided not to directly respond, which would require linking to their sites: I don't intend to feed them any traffic. And, most times now, I just read the garbage and use a simple ad hominem filter to deal with it.

Subscribe to Comments for "D.F.T.T."