Slashdot Mirror


Anonymous Anger Rampant On the Web

the4thdimension writes "In a story that may bring out the 'duh' in you, CNN has a story about how anonymous anger is rampant on the Internet. Citing various reasons, it attempts to explain why sites like MyBiggestComplaint and Just Rage exist and why anger via the web seems to be everywhere. Various reasons include: anonymity, lack of rules, and lack of immediate consequences. Whatever the reason, they describe that online anger has resulted in real-life violence and suggest methods for parents and teens to cope with e-aggression and to learn to be aware of it." I can't figure out what makes me angrier: my habit of anonymously trolling web forums, or my video game playing.

78 of 399 comments (clear)

  1. Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    FUCK YOU!

    1. Re:Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      For the meta mods:
      I modded this post redundant as it is a poor copy of a joke made by Taco in the summary.

    2. Re:Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by hairyfeet · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually I believe John Gabriel's Greater Internet Theory explained the phenomena in the most clear and concise terms.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
    3. Re:Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dude, "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" isn't an insult anymore, it's the plot to a pr0n .avi download.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    4. Re:Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by ozmanjusri · · Score: 2, Informative
      You call that a flame? THIS is a flame...

      You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, you couldn't pour water out of a boot with instructions printed on the heel. You are a canker, an open wound. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You took your last vacation in the Islets of Langerhans.

      You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, and weasel. I take that back; you are a festering pustule on an weasel's rump. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

      You are a squeaking rat, a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal bagpipe player. You were not born. You were hatched into an unwilling world that rejects the likes of you. You didn't crawl out of a normal egg, either, but rather a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil scientist as being below his low standards.
      You are jetsam who dreams of becoming flotsam. You won't make it. Your alleged parents abandoned you at birth and then died of shame in recognition of what they had done to an unsuspecting world. They were a bit late.

      I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you. You have all the appeal of a paper cut.
      Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing.
      You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. You are a technicolor yawn. And did I mention that you smell?

      Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it ever so much more rapidly.

      You are a thick-headed trog. I have seen skeet with more sense than you have. You are a few bricks short of a full load, a few cards short of a full deck, a few bytes short of a core dump, and a few chromosomes short of a full human. Worse than that, you top-post.

      You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you. You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot. You are not ANSI compliant. You have a couple of address lines shorted together. You should be promoted to Engineering Manager.

      Do you really expect your delusional and incoherent ramblings to be read? Everyone plonked you long ago. Do you fantasize that your tantrums and conniption fits could possibly be worth the $0.000000001 worth of electricity used to send them? Your life is one big W.O.M.B.A.T. and your future doesn't look promising either.
      We need to trace your bloodline and terminate all siblings and cousins in order to cleanse humanity of your polluted genes.
      The good news is that no normal human would ever mate with you, so we won't have to go into the sewers in search of your git.

      You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a loathsome disease, a drooling inbred cross-eyed toesucker. You make Quakers shout and strike Pentecostals silent. You have a version 1.0 mind in a version 6.04 world. Your mother had to tie a pork chop around your neck just to get your dog to play with you. You think that http://www.guymacon.com/insult.txt is the name of a rock band.
      You believe that P.D.Q. Bach is the greatest composer who ever lived. You would rather read L. Ron Hubbard than Larry Niven. Hee-Haw is too deep for you. You would watch test patterns all day if the other inmates would let you.

      On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool.

      --
      "I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
    5. Re:Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Informative
      That is not really true. The reality as internet usage spread is, more violent, immature and angry people are using. These people are already violent and will if they feel insulted in the normal interpersonal public space, lash act and attempt to brutalise and dominate those who they feel have insulted them.

      So these same violent individuals gain access to the internet and whom do they interact with, why the very people who they would normally bully if they met them out on the street or in any other public space, those people who would normally have to shut up and just take the violence and abuse.

      Now when those innocent non-violent individuals meet the basically arse hole, failed jock strap, red necks in digital space, they recognise them by their communications mannerisms and do exactly what you would expect them to do, take the bloody piss out of them. A lot of those victims of bullying also get a little out of hand at times with the new found freedom to communicate, with out getting threatened or actually suffering violent physical harm.

      So the problem exists outside of the internet and is not as a result of the internet. You want to end the problem, solve it at it's core root, eliminate those violent racists prejudiced are holes from the population base, detect it an early age via genetics, drug them up and keep the sedated for the rest of their lives and for heavens sake simply don't let them breed. Of course the republicans would loathe the idea, their would be no one left to vote for them ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    6. Re:Let Me Offer a Lemma on This Subject ... by dmizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is not really true. The reality as internet usage spread is, more violent, immature and angry people are using. These people are already violent and will if they feel insulted in the normal interpersonal public space, lash act and attempt to brutalise and dominate those who they feel have insulted them.

      I agree to a certain point. However, online anonymity allows people to say and do things they would never consider doing in real life. Mostly because if they did so in real life, there would be immediate, undesirable, and often painful repercussions. People who are violent and angry will always be violent and angry, but the internet allows people who are normally passive to act out on things which society's mores would otherwise prevent.

  2. Not news by Stone+Rhino · · Score: 5, Funny
    --


    Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
    1. Re:Not news by bughunter · · Score: 2, Funny
      --
      I can see the fnords!
  3. I'm against anonymous anger. by hey! · · Score: 4, Funny

    It distracts from pseudonymous anger, and that makes me mad.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

      I prefer abominous anger. As in the snowman.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Funny

      I am more into ambiguous anger:

      "I am angry at the parade I saw coming through the window!"

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by rugatero · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm loving asynchronous anger, by which I get angrier at you than you do at me.

      --
      This comment is for entertainment purposes only. Any similarity to real insight or information is purely coincidental.
    4. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Er...that would be asymmetrical anger.

      -Posting as sm20591 since Chips & Dips....

    5. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by rugatero · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, yes it would.
      Time to get angry at myself...

      --
      This comment is for entertainment purposes only. Any similarity to real insight or information is purely coincidental.
    6. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 4, Funny

      I was very angry at you last week.

      That was asynchronous anger.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    7. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by hey! · · Score: 5, Funny

      Asynchronous anger is something different altogether, although I think you have to be married to experience.

      Your spouse is always angry about something you did in the past or are about to do in the future. Theoretically they can be mad at you for what you are doing right now, but I think in practice there isn't enough room for that, so it gets shoved into some kind of complex priority queue.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by nine-times · · Score: 5, Funny

      I really like ambivalent anger. But I also kind of hate it.

    9. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      You also have the most strange type of anger where your wife is fuming at you for days due to something you did or didn't do in one of her dreams. That just weirds me out.

    10. Re:I'm against anonymous anger. by hey! · · Score: 5, Funny

      seriously wtf is with that! girls suck!

      Ah. An optimist.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  4. Stupid crap story by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 4, Funny

    on a stupid crap website.

    Slashdot sucks, Digg's much better :)

    1. Re:Stupid crap story by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 5, Funny

      shit, I forgot to click Post Anonymously.

      Oh the irony :(

    2. Re:Stupid crap story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      If it makes you feel any better, I'd be really anonymously pissed off if my name was Rik Sweeney too. If you get married, take your wife's name. Try to look for a woman named Powers. Yeah. Rik Powers. That'd be cool.

    3. Re:Stupid crap story by gnick · · Score: 5, Funny

      Rik Powers? No way.

      Marry Michelle Rohl.

      Rik Rohl would be awesome.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  5. Positive thing by poetmatt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Regardless of how extreme some people respond to some parts of anger, this is a pretty positive thing. I'd rather have someone rant about something online than go out and live out the murder they wished upon someone. /stabbity

    1. Re:Positive thing by hey! · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'd rather have someone rant about something online than go out and live out the murder they wished upon someone.

      Why in the world would you think that these are mutually exclusive alternatives?

      The "steam boiler" model of pop psychology has long been proven to be incorrect. Acting and speaking do not relieve pressure -- or at least very much pressure. Instead human emotions tend to follow feedback loops. Acting and speaking angrily lead to thinking angrily, which lead to further angry actions and speech.

      The word used by psychologists for this feedback phenomenon is "refractory". Anger is a refractory state precisely because angry thoughts and actions lead to further angry thoughts and actions. It is not relief that puts an end to it, it's fatigue.

      Look around at people who act or speak out their anger and those who try to moderate their anger. Who stays angry the longest? The next time you get angry, try to master that anger by thinking objective thoughts. Do you stay angry longer or less long?

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Positive thing by PhrostyMcByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Various reasons include: anonymity, lack of rules, and lack of immediate consequences

      Growing up, we are taught how to act "proper", and much of that involves keeping our emotions bottled up. Everyone gets frustrated with coworkers, on the road, etc. but rarely says anything for fear of consequences. Anger isn't any more rampant on the web than it is in real life, it is just expressed freely here.

      So what is the article really suggesting? That we make rules to have everyone bottle up like normal? A lot of what people say on the net might be exaggerated, but I'm sure this is merely a symptom of finally being able to speak your mind, with the oppression of society lifted. It's like kids cussing a lot with friends because it's forbidden at home, then they grow up and suddenly they don't cuss at trivial things anymore, because they're free to do it.

    3. Re:Positive thing by popmaker · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, well, but people need to vent. It might not be "steam boiler", but we have that need anyway.

      Maybe it has to do with the fact that there might be people agreeing with you. If you're pissed off about something and speak about it openly, you might get feedback from other people with similar feeling and while that MIGHT also leed to you getting more aggressive with the positive feedback, it might also show you that you're not ALONE in being pissed off, which is a very positive and anger-releasing feeling.

      On the other hand, however, "positive feedback" does not describe the internet by any stretch of the imagination.

    4. Re:Positive thing by JCSoRocks · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've got all these mod points and not a single one let's me mod something "scary", "stay away from this guy", or "OMGWTFBBQ". So sad. Although for a moment I considered modding it "informative".

      --
      You are using English. Please learn the difference between loose and lose; they're, there, and their; your and you're.
    5. Re:Positive thing by CFTM · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey I'm just being honest about my short comings/things I need to work on but you can go ahead and make snap judgments without knowing me, that's fine too!

    6. Re:Positive thing by ezzzD55J · · Score: 4, Funny

      you also have an annoying habit of making passive aggressive comments ;)

    7. Re:Positive thing by nine-times · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yeah, but I remember reading about a recent study that showed that people had something like a finite amount of self control. Like if you were put in a position of having to use willpower to keep yourself from doing something, you'd be more likely to succumb to your impulses if you'd been exercising your willpower on something else directly before.

      Now I think the study was regarding addictive behavior specifically (I'm not going to actually go looking for the news story I read about it), but I think it explains why people are inclined to believe the "steam boiler" model. It may not be that letting out anger lessens the amount of anger you have, but rather that relaxing your will and succumbing to your anger allows you well of willpower to recharge a bit, therefore allowing you to reassert a level of self-control that wouldn't otherwise be available.

      If that model is right, then it may be that the best solution is to work on removing the source of the anger, but that the second-best thing to do is still to "blow off steam" in healthier ways that allow you to maintain control. In other words, "bottling it up" might still result in an explosion, even if the "steam boiler" model is incorrect.

    8. Re:Positive thing by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think you are right, in that removing the source of anger is important. That, after all, is the point of anger, isn't it? Except that in so many situations you can't remove the source of anger by being angry. That's civilization for you: you can't haul of and smack somebody you disagree with into submission.

      I agree that if continually provoked to anger (or tempted to do something you are addicted to), you'll end up giving in. But getting angry (unless you can remove the source of anger that way) is no more useful than getting drunk to relieve your alcoholism.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    9. Re:Positive thing by nine-times · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I remember someone saying (maybe it's a famous quote?) something like, "Being angery is like taking poison and hoping the other guy dies." Or maybe it was hate instead of anger or something, but the basic idea is that when you are angry at someone, sometimes your anger is hurting you more than it hurts them.

      I think anger and fear are useful emotions, but sometimes our reactions to them are not useful. It may be that you could argue the same thing about emotions like love and confidence. You can try too hard to hold on to the things you love, and you can get yourself into trouble by being over-confident, for example.

      I may be getting too philosophical here. I guess I'm just saying that there are things that you should get angry about, and so I don't feel comfortable talking about it as a wholly negative emotion. I think the problem is when people don't know how to deal with that anger, especially when that anger is rooted in some other obscure emotional issue that results in misdirected anger.

      And though it's true that acting angry may make you feel more angry, bottling it up or covering it with a smile won't necessarily help you deal with that anger. Ideally we'd all find the real source of our anger, deal with it properly, and figure out how to not get angry in the first place, but I wouldn't be on that utopia coming any time soon. In reality, sometimes finding an appropriate outlet may be helpful.

      On the other hand, I'm not sure being an angry troll on the Internet is an appropriate outlet. It's probably better to go to the batting cage, or whatever kind of meditative physical exertion you prefer. (That's not something I actually do, but it seems like an obvious example: go hit shit with a baseball bat in a socially acceptable environment.)

    10. Re:Positive thing by Obfuscant · · Score: 2, Funny
      The next time you get angry, try to master that anger by thinking objective thoughts.

      I tried that. I started by thinking "oranges are orange", but then that led to the question "why apples aren't apple", and from there I went to "why are there two ways to spell 'grey' (gray) that are both colors, but two ways to spell 'red' (read) and only one of them is?" and that made me really mad.

      And THEN I thought about the guy who created the word "orange" specifically so you couldn't write a poem about oranges and THAT pushed me over the edge.

    11. Re:Positive thing by Obfuscant · · Score: 2, Funny
      (Actually, I suppose it's no more a stretch than using 'orange' in the first place).

      The orange, the orange, a non-musical fruit,
      Eat all you want, there will be no toot.
      Drunk raw from the glass at each breakfast meal,
      Not good with the cookies but great with some veal.
      Add it to vodka and have a screwdriver,
      A drink that will cost you more than a fiver.
      But don't try to rhyme the name of the orange
      'cause it will make your poem sound really odd and ruin the entire effect.

  6. So much better to go public... by tjstork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I mean, I've gone from Excellent to Bad Karma in three days of raging on slashdot, and were I not on the verge of getting kicked off, I could go on raging for three days more and go for the mystical Evil rating.

    --
    This is my sig.
  7. Wouldn't they be angry anyway? by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Whatever the reason, they describe that online anger has resulted in real-life violence

    Of course I didn't RTFA, but I have to wonder, to what extent would these people be angry about whatever they did anyway? I tend to get impatient/grumpy/angry in many situations, regardless of whether it's online or offline (in lines at the bank, stores, etc.). Yeah, it's a bit easier to vent online sometimes, in IM thread, some forums, and so on, but I've vented in public and with friends/colleagues offline for years, well before the world of 'online'.

    Perhaps in a way its better than people do this online and stay away from other people in the real world to avoid physical harm to themselves and others.

    1. Re:Wouldn't they be angry anyway? by Indras · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but the difference is, if you vent in public with friends or coworkers, there's no trace of it left behind, except only vaguely in your memories, which are difficult to search and compile into a nice report.

      Venting on the internet, however, is practically permanent.

      --
      The speed of time is one second per second.
  8. Sad Really by mfh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This reminds me of Lord of the Flies. The masks make the demons feel like they can act without consequence.

    Personally I think it's good for our psyches to take some form of abuse as long as we have a strong coping mechanism, and a strategy to deal with it. Truth be told, flies that are the dirtiest when they are young actually live the longest. Clean flies die quickly. So what I'm saying is that rampant nerd rage is a good thing because people get stuff off their chest, and as long as people understand how to deal with internet rage, then they can actually become mentally stronger from being entangled in it. Reminds me of the Hellmouth stories too, and how that whole discussion was such a healing power for so many.

    But it's sad we have to deal with such powerful demons, and that demons are so contagious.

    --
    The dangers of knowledge trigger emotional distress in human beings.
    1. Re:Sad Really by xstonedogx · · Score: 5, Funny

      So what I'm saying is that rampant nerd rage is a good thing because people get stuff off their chest...

      Plus it gives you 10 strength and 50% damage resistance if your health drops below 20%.

    2. Re:Sad Really by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So what I'm saying is that rampant nerd rage is a good thing because people get stuff off their chest

      This is commonly said. Unfortunately, it's not true. When people habitually get themselves angry, even if it's "only online and not IRL," they get habituated to being angry.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    3. Re:Sad Really by Achoi77 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Plus it gives you 10 strength and 50% damage resistance if your health drops below 20%.

      Not since the patch. :-( The buff was considered OP because it would proc passively when your HP dropped below 20%. They have since moved it to a Troll racial ability and made it so it can be cast at any time. But they only recieve the full benefit of the buff if they are badly damaged. Fortunately it's got a long cooldown so it can't be spammed.

  9. Good by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good. There is a lot to be angry about, and people have been far too sheep-like for far too long.

    Here's a fitting response to this article from the fictional Howard Beale:

    I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth; banks are going bust; shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter; punks are running wild in the street, and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it.

    We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat. And we sit watching our TVs while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be!

    We all know things are bad -- worse than bad -- they're crazy.

    It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out any more. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we're living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, "Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials, and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone."

    Well, I'm not going to leave you alone.

    I want you to get mad!

    I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your Congressman, because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street.

    All I know is that first, you've got to get mad.

    You've gotta say, "I'm a human being, goddammit! My life has value!"

    So, I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell,

    "I'm as mad as hell,

    and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    1. Re:Good by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You're right. But, the first thing they do is, they express their anger as anonymously as they can, to find out if they are alone, because they know if they are alone, they cannot act effectively.

      If they are not alone, they will come to see this fact. Together.

      Then, after they realize they are not alone, one person will stand up and say "My name is Joe Crazy. I am not going to take this anymore. Who is with me?"

      And THIS is when they will start cleaning up their society.

      And when they finally do, it will be gloriously violent, as those who have been exploiting the rule of law to oppress their fellow man are hoisted by their own petard.

      They will be hoisted by the masses who finally realize that they do not wish to live in an oppressive, efficient society based on the rule of law with the faint hope that they might one day get to be Dictator Bush, but just want to co-operate, take care of their needs and spend the rest of their time enjoying their life.

      It's inevitable.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    2. Re:Good by Machtyn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's interesting that you rate anarchy higher than order, or "efficient society". The rule of law and order prevent the anarchy that would, in the end, destroy everyone and everything.

      Yes, there are a bunch of problems with society. But these problems aren't because of the law and societal norms, it is because people are breaking the law and societal norms. You state "Dictator Bush"... yes, I suppose he's broken some of the law and that's why people are angry with him. I'm angry at McCain and Obama. Why? Because they break the rules or their platform is based on breaking the rules that are tried and true. (Change is not necessarily good.) People are angry with the financial markets. Why? Because the ones at the top are breaking the law and rules.

    3. Re:Good by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      When a man is in fear of his life, fighting in the service of those who cannot defend themselves, it is glorious regardless of how ugly it is. Not because he overcame his enemy, but because he overcame his fear and made a sacrifice of himself.

      The sole and entire purpose of violence is to overcome an enemy. There is no other excuse for it. To glorify a courageous sacrifice, separately from any contribution it may make to overall victory, is to encourage entirely futile waste of life, and is to my mind wholly monstrous; that is why I say that people who put about such ideas and perpetuate 'the old Lie' are the ones who ought to be shot first when the violence starts.

      Now to sacrifice one's life in such a way that it does contribute substantially to the overcoming of an enemy, that might be something that should reasonably be encouraged - though I will not call it glorious, it is at least as sordid and horrible as any other violent death. But there are many who courageously sacrifice themselves for nothing. For example, there was nothing worthwhile at all about the sacrifices made by the kamikaze pilots. They died entirely in vain, for by that stage there was no hope that their deaths could ever save their country. They would have done far better to go home to their families and live out their lives there. Will you call it glorious?

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    4. Re:Good by Cyran0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Isn't it funny how everyone who imagines this kind of dystopian revenge fantasy imagines themselves as the victorious overthrowers, rather than the overthrown or as those who get caught in the middle? The truth is that the vast majority of those who think in these terms are too busy playing their dystopian video games to actually do anything. The few wingnuts who do actually try to act usually just end up shooting up their school, place of employment, or whatever, and either end up in prison or shooting themselves. The ones who post about it online at least provide a clue as to their intentions, increasing the probability that they will be stopped.

    5. Re:Good by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, there are a bunch of problems with society. But these problems aren't because of the law and societal norms, it is because people are breaking the law and societal norms.

      Quite frequently, yes, but hardly always. Laws and societal norms can easily be a problem unto themselves. Jim Crow laws, and the societal racism that created and justified them, were a very big problem. The laws of China, or the U.S.S.R., were a major societal problem even when they are being followed. There is no possible way you could say that the problems of society are only caused by breaking the law or societal norms.

      You are quite correct, though, in stating that this is better than anarchy. The solution to problematic laws is to correct those laws, eliminating or replacing them. Not to do away with the rule of law entirely. Part of the reason, aside from what any rapid descent into anarchy would do for the safety of the public at large, is that anarchy is unstable. Anarchy can last only as long as it takes for the wealthy and ambitious to decide that an absence of rules is a perfect opportunity for them to impose their own. The practical reality of anarchy is that it leads to war and dictatorship. The only exceptions are the same exceptions wherein Communism works similarly to its ideal: Small, isolated communes that exist as social experiments within an otherwise stable society of laws.

      You state "Dictator Bush"... yes, I suppose he's broken some of the law and that's why people are angry with him.

      I'm quite angry at Bush for things that are not against the law at all. Being such a frakin ignorant moron that you think you can invade Iraq without a plan for the occupation and think everything will turn out okay isn't illegal, and judging by the number who bought it at least at the beginning, isn't against societal norms either.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:Good by postbigbang · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No one need answer your agenda. We do so in the quest for communications and to seek common ground. We don't whip out weapons and start shooting.

      There is only rarely justification for violence of any kind. The Bush administration has abused this in the quest of fear-mongering. My long dead ancestors fought in Virginia, then years later at Antietam, Gettysburg, and so on. Some of them were caucasian.

      When I got my draft card, I burned it. I'd do it again. Vietnam wasn't justified, nor was Iraq War I or II. Capturing the madmen of 9/11 is justified; they must be brought to justice, and they so far have escaped, except perhaps one.

      In the interim, over 450,000 Iraqi fathers, sons, brothers, uncles, and mothers, aunts, children have been killed because of Dick Cheney's ego, and George Bush's unwitting aid to the enemy. Yes, Saddam Hussein was horrible. But then, so has been the violence of Tutsis against Hutu, the red fields of Cambodia, and so many other horrible places.

      You stop violence one situation at a time. It can be done. There is no justification for taking the life of another except in self-defense. Only animals believe otherwise, not humans that can respect feelings, or choose to ignore seeming insult.

      --
      ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  10. Complaining about being anonymous is ad hominem by doconnor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Complaining about someone being anonymous to discredit them is an ad hominem attack. Hiding their identity doesn't make their argument any worse and revealing it doesn't make it any better.

    Hiding their identity only make people more honest and allows their foolish beliefs to be addressed and discredited, which may not have been possible otherwise.

    1. Re:Complaining about being anonymous is ad hominem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I totally agree with you, although I realize that does not amount to a hill of dogshit.

    2. Re:Complaining about being anonymous is ad hominem by FooBarWidget · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Then what about trolling and people who are deliberately spreading disinformation? If there are too many of them, then fighting each and every anonymous poster is going to waste a lot of time. Time that could have been used for more useful activities instead.

    3. Re:Complaining about being anonymous is ad hominem by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Why do we believe anything people write on the internet to begin with? How many fiction authors write under assumed names?

      Why do we assume the bullshit detector only gets turned on from "known false" sources. It should always be on, even when watching the nightly news.

      Fact doesn't come from people, fact comes from inanimate objects. There is value in what people write, it's just not about gaining information. Sometimes even a frothy AC has a unique perspective on something. It may be justified with total trash data, but that doesn't make the perspective invalid.

  11. Get on the phone by pubjames · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Whenever I get an angry work-related email I immediately get on the phone to the person. It is amazing the difference when speaking on the phone, often the person will very quickly become quite apologetic for their email when you phone them.

    1. Re:Get on the phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes, those annoying anonymous corporate emails with names and phone numbers.

  12. one thing that can be done about it by ronbohn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah it's really ridiculous how some people act. I've noticed racism is a real biggie for gamers. I think most people out there mean well, but it seems that sometimes this stuff can have a snowball effect...one person says something, then another. I say try to cut it off at the source so when somebody says something really ignorant, just be like "dude that's not cool"

    1. Re:one thing that can be done about it by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

      snowball

      The correct term is "caucasian". "European American" or even "white person" are acceptable alternatives.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    2. Re:one thing that can be done about it by gnick · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A "snowball" is a term used to describe an affect of exponential increase, not a person.

      Snowball was a character in Clerks - The opening plot point to a rather uncomfortable scene. I find it distasteful (pun intended) that you feel the need to bring him up here. However if you were instead referring to the Trotsky-pig from Animal Farm you are entirely forgiven - That is a fine example of a large group turning on their victim due to mob mentality and a malicious leader acting as a catalyst.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
  13. Easy by HalAtWork · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When you say something in anger in meatspace, people hold you accountable and may consider what you say as threatening, and there can be consequences, especially in the workspace. Also, people want an audience, and when they're really pissed off they want everyone to know about it. This stuff can be healthy. Of course there are other people where the anger grows inside them and they just post snide remarks and try to piss on peoples' parades and ruin people's days, these people feed their anger and become bitter. It's all about why you're doing it and if you're trying to get rid of some angry feelings and vent, or if you're festering.

  14. Re:Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory by maxume · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nice job asshole, somebody already posted that fucking link.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  15. When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor by Hognoxious · · Score: 5, Funny

    "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!!"

    I agree. What this calls for is a really stupid and futile gesture on somebody's part.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  16. "Rampant" is probably not correct. by hey! · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unless people are posting at standing desks using some kind of gestural input, I doubt that much Internet rage takes place rampant.

    It's much more likely that most Internet rage takes place sejant erect .

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  17. E-aggression? by PontifexMaximus · · Score: 5, Funny

    WTF? Do we need to put an E (or I) in front of every-bloody-thing that might occur online? I mean really? There is no difference between 'aggression' and 'e-aggression' except for where it happens. I mean, if I get pissed off about something in the loo, is that 'P-aggression'? Or if I'm pissed at a strip club is that 'DD-aggression'?

    I mean, can't you n00bs stop that crap?

    --
    Pax Vobiscum
  18. read the examples of internet hate they mention by stormguard2099 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I know most wont rtfa but my god the examples they use are hillariously bad. I was expecting whole sentences constructed out of *s+ 3 or 4 letters but no. It was talking about how celebrities had a flamewar or two online or one politician used a racial slur and surprise surprise, it got reported online.

    the only decent example was the myspace girl who commited suicide, meagan.

    im not sure i want to listen to a major news corp that cant even find decent examples of anon hate online. i mean jesus christ, just pick any slashdot and browse at -1!

    --
    http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
  19. Re:Tolling has been around for ages, but... by Z34107 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Most people in America are angrier than usual due to the worsening economic conditions caused by Bush's oil war which bankrupted the nation. That's what's really being reflected on the web. Bush and Cheney are basically war criminials. I'm hoping people take it their rage at the voting booths.

    Oooh, mad libs!

    Most people in America are sillier than usual due to the diabetes caused by Bush's evil, putrid, orphan-exploiting existence which caffeinated the nation. That's what's really being monkeyed on the web. Bush and Cheney are basically evil, putrid, orphan-exploiters. I'm hoping people take it their rage at the carnival.

    But, I think my version made more sense.

    --
    DATABASE WOW WOW
  20. Racism I've encountered online by CristalShandaLear · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nowhere have I found more anger than in yahoo hearts.

    For the most part online, I find people to be fairly polite if not a little more crude or pointed than they would be in real life. On message boards, chat rooms, even places like FARK - there are always rules and people bend the boundaries to breaking but the die-hard bigots are truly a dying breed. Then again, maybe it's just a matter of all out flame wars and such being ended by admins and such before they really get started anymore.

    But even in something as simple as yahoo hearts, I have found the most bigoted, racist, discriminatory people you ever want to meet. I mean one day, the host of table playing Yahoo Graffiti was booting anyone that had a brown person icon. Or in Yahoo hearts people are quick to use the n-word and such.

    However by the same token, I have never encountered racism playing Yahoo Literati. And I find it speaks volumes that people who would play a game that that is related to words and depth of vocabulary and knowledge would be the very people to be the kindest and most interesting people I've encountered online.

    I wholeheartedly believe that there is direct relationship between IQ and the level of every day bigotry and racism expressed by any given individual. I believe the same co-relation between those who are rich and/or powerful as this does not necessarily relate to intelligence - or that those who are rich, powerful and intelligent use tools such as racism and bigotry to manipulate those who are none of those things.

    I guess I always wonder - what truly is the point of being a bigot or racist? Oh well....more observations that really any information here.

  21. Road Rage by WorkingDead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The same goes for road rage. You would never run down the hallway at work, while on your cell phone, yelling at all the other people who are not full out sprinting. But you sure would on your way there in the morning.

    1. Re:Road Rage by PRMan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But they would never cut right in front of you and slow down so much as to impede your progress while another person walked at a similar speed blocking the rest of the hallway. And at worse, if they did this (for instance, standing in a doorway) a mere "excuse me" would let you by to continue on faster.

      It's precisely because the roadway doesn't mirror the hallway that people get so frustrated. I have seen some pretty nasty episodes in the lines at Costco.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:Road Rage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You would never run down the hallway at work, while on your cell phone, yelling at all the other people who are not full out sprinting.

      Where do you work? It sounds like a nice place...

  22. Without Anonomous There is Censorship. by jimwelch · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have found that most people will not state their opinions if they are forced to sign them. The consequences of a opinion can be far more severe than is justified from those in power. Too often those in power, abuse power. Which side you are on, does not matter, both side have a fringe that goes off the deep end. For a few examples, see Nixon, J. Edgar Hoover, College Faculty (tenure granting is power). Ben Franklin had to use a pseudo-name so he would not be arrested. Writers during the witch hunts of the McCarthy era. Women writers had to pretend to be men to get published.

    Anonymous is very useful! If you use is wisely! Put forth your arguments clearly and logically. Stir the emotions only as needed. Leave the hate behind. Leave the anger behind.

    --
    Never trust a man wearing a coat and tie!
  23. Solution by Peregr1n · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The politest, friendliest, most trustworthy forum I belong to forces you to register with your real name. As it's linked to a commerce system, I imagine they can double-check it with the credit details they have on file for me. I know a lot of people would hate this, but I love it - everyone on there thinks very carefully before posting.

  24. Ya Don't Say... by JoeSixpack00 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Online anger has resulted in real-life violence?

    Most people are jerks online because it won't get them a punch in the face. 99% of the crap people say to you would never get said in person, because it'll likely result in an ass kicking. Literally 0% of the things I've been called have never been said towards me in person.

    And I don't need a study to tell me that. I learned that 10 years ago when the rudest people online wouldn't even reveal their IP address - yet alone their real identity. I went from an ircx chat server to an ircd with masked ips with the same group of people and everyone all of a sudden became John Wayne.

  25. Re:Tolling has been around for ages, but... by rk · · Score: 2, Funny

    But, I think my version made more sense.

    I don't know if it made more sense, but I think it would make a better movie.

  26. Re:G.I.F.T. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is there a greater oxymoron in the english language than Windows Genuine Advantage?

    Yes. Microsoft Works.

  27. like road rage by AdamThor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I heard about this one with respect to road rage: You're in your car, which you psychologically treat as your personal "territory". You act more dominant when you're on your own turf. So you get a bunch of people together who are acting dominant and the sparks fly. In this case it's your computer, in your house. Not too suprising that people in general might expect more deference than they otherwise would.

    --
    -- "Oh. This guy again."
  28. Re:That's right: "Take the 5th", while you still c by postbigbang · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You see, there are those of us that believe that unless directly challenged, violence is unnecessary. Part of this is the fact that we have a problem as a species with violence that dates back to a time when it was all we had to defend ourselves and engender discipline. Civility requires we examine alternates, or we all succumb to murderous and violent tendencies.

    Diplomacy in various forms can work. Appeasement isn't necessarily good diplomacy. That's what Chamberlin did before WWII, where others of my ancestry fought. Some are buried in Europe. So it goes. Then, there was a direct threat.

    We ignore African violence because the caucasians in power in the US aren't of African origin, and so they don't believe they have a 'dog in that fight'. In Darfur, so many have been displaced, killed, raped, maimed, and otherwise have been victims of violence as we turned away.

    We went to the Balkans, where they fight wars of their ancestors dating to 400CE. We kept ethnic Albanians from certain death, after many were slaughtered wholesale.

    But we supported the deaths of millions of supposed communists in Indonesia by Suharto and broad parts of SE Asia during the 1950s. These are all facts. Look them up. None of it had to happen. None of it. Fear brings about violence.

    Part of the success of the United States has been internal liberty. I defend that liberty constantly. That the US government has been the perpetrator of violence across the world doesn't seem to be easily remembered by the populace. So many wars, so little time. Most of the wars not easily remembered were at the behest of protecting almighty US business interests. Never mind that innocents were slaughtered. It was the businesses that mattered and so we floated Marines into Central America, Asia, Africa, and to a much lesser extent, the Middle East.

    There are some cultures that believe that violence is perfectly acceptable in terms of a societal disciplining method. Humans are treated like animals. It's amazing the don't eat people, as the regard for their lives is small. It's been that way, and the advance of civilization requires dignifying life, and reducing violence that's otherwise incumbent.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
  29. "I Accept" by refactored · · Score: 3, Funny

    Perhaps all this a nonny mouse anger arises from the mile long EULAs that we are supposed to read (but don't) ((because we'd start rioting if we were forced to)).

    At the end of these sublimely irritating EULA's is an "I Accept" button.

    However, nobody, but nobody, clicks on an "I Accept" button thinking "I truly accept, understand and welcome these words of wisdom which in exchange for a paltry sum of money, have made my life much better".

    Universally, on clicking on "I Accept" around the 'net the one silent, but LOUD thought occurs, which is, as the parent so aptly expressed, "FUCK YOU!"