Online Idiocy

What is it with some people, who post their words to various media on the Internet, where they know that others can comment on their words, or even create blogs or websites dedicated to showing how their words are examples of insane thinking, that these idiots then will then claim “online stalking?”

Are they so demented, that they cannot differentiate between reality and words posted on blogsites or in comment forms?

I think the first time I was ever accused of “online” stalking was after some discussions with someone that calls them-self “Princess Monkey.”

Now, I have no idea if Princess Monkey is a woman or not, other than the fact this person chose to use a moniker, “Princess,” which has been traditionally used by females. Now, this Princess Monkey person has also let it be known that it (I prefer to use the term “it” rather than “he/she”) is studying to become a nurse as well as claimed to be a wife, but I refuse to let those traditional occupations, being made of a majority of females, influence me in my judgement of this person.

But instead, because this PM person sent me an email from a University domain located in a city in an Ontario, and then let me in on some of it’s own personal thoughts, my using this person’s thoughts in my response, using it’s own words, to suggest a certain reality, meant that I was possibly “stalking” this person.

My next experience with the accusation of online stalking or harassment was with some chick that calls herself a libertarian, and who discusses her own sex live, orgasms, and fantasies on her blog, named Jackie Passey.

Jackie and I had some discussion, philosophically on the subject of marriage, but objected to some of my comments – but on her own emotional basis, rather than from a logical basis. Even though she continued to visit MY blog, and respond to comments ON MY BLOG, that I was responding to, ON MY BLOG, she made absurd accusations about me, being unable on her part to differentiate between reality and words. The odd thing was that all conversation too place on MY blog. Only anyone insane would make accusations of “harassment” when it is their choice to read my words, if they want to load my blog in their browser.
She then went on to make other false accusations against me in the comments of other folks’ blogs. I find it utterly amazing that a person, three thousand miles away from another person, in this age of the Internet, can apparently do the same things as someone who is ten feet away, in reality.

But getting on with this “stalking” business. Yesterday, I discovered that some idiot who calls itself “Anonalogue” wrote this:

“… you’ve been stalking me ever since from site to site insulting my intelligence.”

~ Jay Jardine Blog In The Comment Section

Now this is quite interesting, for I have no fucking clue who this entity that calls itself “Anonalogue” is, and I have no desire to insult some entitiy that I cannot identify. How the hell can I “stalk” (or even personally insult) something I don’t even know what it is? For all I know, Anonalogue could simply be some computer program, written by a very poor programmer, programmed to respond in certain ways to some stimuli; words.

I will admit that I have for some years, commented on blogs, and commented on commentators comments on blogs. Recently, (My understanding of the term “recent,”), some comments attributed to some dopey entity named “Anonalogue” have appeared on a variety of blogs I have visited many times, recently. I have, and full heartedly, and honestly admit to commenting on this idiot “Anonalogue’s” irrational comments myself, when I have felt motivated to do so.

Many times, I have come across this idiot entity named “Anonalogue” and not bothered to point out it’s insane thinking at the time.

Yet, because I have on about four occasions in the last month, this idiot entity named Anonalogue decides that I am “stalking” it.

It’s fucking amazing to me, that on line, where we use words, and words are used to show irrationality, or untruths, or insane thinking, that when using words, one could emote that they are being “stalked.” Here you have some entity that identifies itself as “Anonalogue” posting their insane thoughts on various blogs, and when one comes across them and points out the insanity of their thoughts, ends up being accused of “stalking” them.

Well, god damn, Anonalogue, if you don’t want your comments to be commented on in the blog world, and view such action as “stalking,” then try to be sane (or ask your programmer to reprogram you with some sense of reality) if you can about your philosophy of “stalking,” and refrain from posting on blogs, where your comments might be challenged.

If you think challenging your comments when one comes across them is “stalking” you, then, as much as I do not have any professional attributes to consider you insane, my own sense and understanding of reality will consider your thinking to be insane. If you decide to post comments on blogs I’ve been visiting and commenting on long before anyone who identified themself as “Anonalogue” has been visiting those same blogs and commenting, and then suggest that I’m stalking you, you really have some major insane issues.

And instead of your insane Silliness regarding “stalking,” how about you just answer the comments that are in response to yours, using rationality?

But then, I discovered that not only does Jackie Passey and Anonalogue engage in this insane idea of “stalking” or harassment as far as blogs go, so does Kate of Small Dead Minds. She apparently writes, in a letter to the CBC:

“If the CBC is going to allow another roundtable member to direct their traffic to a site operated by an internet stalker”

She is of course, referring to other blogs that would take her comments, record them, and want them “proofed” to be “online stalking.” How pathetic is this? Does Kate really and truly believe in free speech, or only that speech which she agrees with, and to be damned with anyone else that would question her, regardless of how inspired, or how much energy is behind the questions for Kate? Would Kate suggest a lawyer, in a court of law, demanding a straight forward answer from Kate for her past statements, was “stalking?” And what the fuck is the problem with someone concentrating on Kate’s statements of mistruth, or statements of irrationality, if that is their choice to do so? What makes this “stalking?”

If you’re going to play in the adults’ sandbox, and throw sand yourself, then don’t cry about “stalking” when the sand is thrown right back at you. And if you’re going to throw sand once, don’t cry if the sand is thrown back at you a dozen times. Either it is ok to throw sand, or it is not. The question of how often is mute, silly, insane, and in the end, you’re nothing but a cry baby, trying to change the rules about sand throwing.

And sand throwing, as far as disputing and holding you responsible for what you have written, is NOT STALKING. There is NO comparison between finding your comments on blogs throughout the Internet, asking you to be responsible for your comments, or to explain them in light of other things you have write, to real life stalking, where someone is hiding on your personal property, and interfering with your personal privacy.

Once you have written anything publicly, you are fair game to have what you have written compared, reproved, held accountable for, asked regarding you real meanings, have your words held against you, over and over and over, if need be.

If you consider this “stalking,” then get off the internet, and send your thoughts privately in silly Christmas Cards.

Otherwise, you’re just a silly online idiot, that has no maturity to deal with any words or issues that you don’t like, just like a little baby that has not experienced love. But you know what? That ain’t our problem. Your words are our problem, and if we come across them, we expect you to take responsibility for them, just as I take responsibility for mine.

Anonalogue, are you so immature and have such a poor emotional outlook upon yourself, that whenever I bother to comment on a comment you’ve made on a blog I’ve been visiting for far longer than you’ve been around, emote that I am “stalking” you? Are you that pitiful a person, that instead of answering and responding to the questions put to you, you must resort to such idiocy and silliness about “stalking?”Are you really that demented in the head? So.. I plan on continuing my actions – of asking you to be responsible for your comments on other blogs, and I shall forever, as long as I am able and as long as it interests me, question you on your premises wherever I may find your comments.. you may, like McMillan, decide to call this “stalking” – what would you like to have as “punishment” for what you deem stalking? Would you like the government to take away my Internet privileges? Stop me from questioning you on your premises?

Huh? And how exactly would you like the authorities to determine what is exactly, online “stalking” anyhow? Define it, Anonalogue, silly twit. Define it, Kate McMillan, also sometimes a silly twit.

And do you define “online stalking” the same way as you would, say.. real life stalking, where some woman or man is constantly harassed in real life, wherever they go? Where actual, physical, real injury to your person is a possibility? You really think that someone commenting on your posts on some blogs constitutes a threat to your physical being? Or perhaps, you’re so insane, you have insane fears about being held responsible, regardless of how often that should occur, for your past comments?
If so, do you want us to be compelled to stop writing our words, asking you questions about your basic premises, showing you where you are incorrect, logically speaking, on the Internet? Is that what you want?

Cut the fucking bullshit about this silly and insane idea of “stalking” on line. You are free to read rebuttals, questioning your intelligence, or anything else you perceive as “insulting,” and then further participate – or not – as you wish. I am free to show you no matter what time of night it is, regardless of time stamps, regardless of whether I have children or not, regardless of what hours my business demands of me to, to show you your insane thoughts and ignorance of reality. I’m free to show you how much you fantasize. You’re free to not read my comments. You’re free to not respond to them.

You’re also free to continue your own insane writing. Would you want me to be less free to point out your insane writing to you? Is that what you really want?

You don’t like it when I take you to task for your reporting of a “fact” that has no reasonable citation? You don’t like it when I take you to task for your assertions of your own fairy tales instead of reality?

It bugs you that I’m not part of your herd? So you decide to use ad hominem, the tool of assholes and idiots everywhere, to try to gain popular support for an opinion, instead of seeking truth?

I’m sitting here at my computer, challenging you to discuss truth, and I have no goal to ever meet you in person, nor shall I expend any energy in doing so, yet, you wish to confuse real life “stalking” with online “stalking” simply because I have decided to debate you, challenge you, show forth your insane thinking, your ignorance of inherent rights, your fallacies of confusion, ad hominem, and that bothers you so much, you’d consider alleging “online stalking” against me?

Because I hate your ideas, and your philosophy, and can show you that your very premises are absolutely incorrect?

You are an idiot, and accuse me of “stalking” because you have nothing else to offer. Accusing me of something that is considered a “serious charge” by the masses – the very masses that you despise when they end up disagreeing with you, but the very masses you wish you could convince you were right, without any real desire for truth, and simply respond, “You’re stalking me” will be enough to have the masses ignore the truth, or the question or the principle that you’re not comfortable because of your own inconsistencies. Your own insane thinking about reality. Your own insane thinking about your choices, and the choices of others to spend their time as they wish to spend their time.
You are frauds. You are fraudulently telling others that those who would find your comments on blogs, and take issue with what you say, are “stalking” you, instead of YOU dealing with the substance of what has been taken issue with.

You are unable to answer to what has been taken issue with though. You pretend to be in favour of rights, yet, when it suits you, or when it is something you don’t care much for, you have no principles at all. Especially when you insinuate you may sue for libel, when in fact, there has been nothing libelous said about you. Just stuff you don’t like.
You’re in this as if truth were a popularity contest. You’re not interested in truth at all, except what you have been arbitrarily taught as truth, and because you’ve been taught this, it must be real regardless of every other possibility that you refuse to even rationally consider. It’s too much of a threat to you. You are unable to think. You very often use the fallacy of only two answers to a question, and ignore the fact there may be a third better answer.

The third better answer just doesn’t quite fit your “beliefs,” so instead of examining your beliefs, you toss out all possibilities for truth.

And that makes you an idiot. Oh, you can “obsess” about owning the blog that has the most daily posts (right Kate? You know I know what you mean, because you even admitted this to me once), but “truth” is not an obsession about popularity. And then when you find others who, because of your goal to post daily so often, take issue with what you have posted, over and over, and call them obsessive, you left out the part about yourself being obsessive with owning the blog that in Canada, has more daily posts than any other blog.

I’d prefer someone that obsessed about “truth” – quality over quantity. But I’ll admit, many Canadians are not so obsessed about truth – regardless of what political spectrum they are in. If I wanted to be “popular,” all I’d have to do is find a political spectrum I liked, and post a lot of shit with the idea of my post hitting a political insane nerve with people I wanted to be popular with.

I dare you all.. all of the “stalker” insinuators.. Jackie.. Kate.. Anonalogue.. to present exactly what your beliefs are, your very basic beliefs, premises, about anything, and then logically ensure that all opinion matches those beliefs. 100% of the time. I dare you, and I know you cannot do it. You’re too interested in “popularity” then in “truth.”

I despise you. Because you would, if you could, decide what consensual acts, or what I say, or what I write, or what my opinion should be, based on what you think is ‘correct’. I despise you all. And you are all free to come sue me, or carry through in Anonalgue’s case, with insinuations of “stalking.”

If you’re not going to carry through with an insinuation, then don’t fucking bother, dude. It just shows you how cowardly you are. My name is Ian Scott, my address for service is easy to find – you blog anonymously, and I have no fucking clue who you are or where you are, so you are more than free, and welcome to carry through with your allegations of “stalking.” IN fact, if you are NOT willing to do so, shut the fuck up.

But of course, I will fight for your right to say what you want. But I won’t stand up for you when you claim “libel” when no such libel exists, or when you claim “stalking” when no such “stalking” exists. What does exist is your insane projections in your own mind.

P.S. Anonalogue… still looking for your response to a very straightforward question over at Jay Jardine’s place.  Care to answer anytime soon?

4 thoughts on “Online Idiocy”

  1. Welcome to the Anonalogue Stalkers Club. We even have jackets 😉 WOW, Anonalogue must have been working a real number on you to get this type of responce, but he does have the effect on people, especially when he posts blantantly libelous comments (he seriously got to me about a month ago). Well stop be the Wingnuterer if you have the time, I’m firing up the presses on my old buddy Anonalogue, time to rake him over the coals a few times. I don’t even have to write anything, since Anonalogue’s own words speak volumes about his ethics and character.

  2. “Anonalogue must have been working a real number on you to get this type of responce, but he does have the effect on people, especially when he posts blantantly libelous comments (he seriously got to me about a month ago)”

    No one works “numbers” on me. I blog for fun. He has no effect on me, other than my own desire to show him his own insane thinking.

    I may or may not, give Anonalogue special attention, depending on how I decide at any given moment to write, post, or show anyone’s insane thoughts.

    Even Tarantino has been a “victim” of mine when he posted bullshit about his fiance. 😉

    I have no more interest in showing Anonalogue, whatever it might be, reality based thinking, or those on the “left” or the “right” – but for now, Anon’s comments, as well as Kate’s email, both of which discussed “stalking,” a most insane concept when it comes to blogs or commenting on blogs, has me interested.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top