Tag Archives: comment section

The Most Ridiculous Comment Section Thread I’ve Ever Been a Part Of

It was a few months ago that I was at KOMO’s website and stumbled over an article called “First Date Tips:  Talk About George W. Bush.”  Now obviously I don’t care about or need dating tips anymore, but the “Talk About George W. Bush” thing seemed at least mildly amusing enough to get me to mindlessly click on it.  Naturally, the article wasn’t that interesting (probably mostly because, as I said, I don’t care about or need dating tips), but at the end of this list of “Do’s” and “Do not’s,” I caught a comment by a user named “Ron Burgandy” (sic) that amused me.

Now like most red-blooded, white, American males who were in their 20’s in 2005, I love the movie Anchorman.  And while it sometimes gets overly quoted, THIS was a good place for it.  It worked, and I laughed.

I’ve heard that quote used before, too.  And when it does, I like to follow up with the next line in the movie.

If you’re as nit-picky as I am, you may notice that I slightly misquoted it.  Ron doesn’t say “any” in the movie, just “That doesn’t make sense.”  As minor as that seems, it is worth noting as we move forward with the story.

Within a few minutes to a few hours, I got an email notification that “Ron Burgandy” replied.  “Fun!” I thought, as I was sure he was going to continue the back-and-forth I’d just stared.


Of course they’re lines from the movie, “Ron.”  I know that; it’s why I said what I said.  My eye-rolling at this was strong enough to overcome a significant portion of my growing comment-section-restraint-maturity that I responded–

Then I went and found that scene in Anchorman on YouTube and added a second comment with nothing but the link.

And that should be it, right?  Done deal.  Guy quotes movie, second guy quotes next line in movie, guy doesn’t get it, second guy provides information for guy to see that he also quoted the movie.  The only logical next action on his part is one of two things.  He could feel silly and keep quiet, never acknowledging that I responded, because he saw what I had said but doesn’t want to admit he goofed; OR he comments with something to the effect of, “Oh, that’s right–my bad.”

But that’s not at all what “Ron Burgandy” did.

Wow.  Let’s evaluate what’s happened here.  It seems that “Ron” took my comment, and the subsequent video link, to mean that I was berating him because he didn’t quote Anchorman 100% verbatim and therefore he got it all wrong and should feel foolish.  Would anyone disagree with my assessment of his perspective?  And to think I was a little embarrassed by slightly misquoting it myself.

A few days later I got around to actually responding, and all I did was briefly point out what I thought would be known in the first place by a guy naming himself after a character in a movie he’s quoting.  I don’t have much else to add.  I just find myself needing an audience when ridiculousness of this magnitude comes my way.


Arguing with Idiots

I’ve been mistaken before as a person who “has to be right.”  This is not correct.  I have no problem being wrong.  None.  When I’m shown that I’m wrong, I go through what I think are normal stages of denial, anger, and acceptence, but I can absolutely admit that I’m incorrect about something.  What I ACTUALLY am is someone who can’t stand someone else being wrong.  You may say that’s not much better, but I say that’s up for debate.  This goes for factual errors they have, like the guy that I met through an old roommate one day who was wrong about every movie trivia thing he brought up.  The one I remember– Him:  “So that new Die Hard movie is coming out this summer?  Man, they released those FAST.”  Me:  “Fast?  How do you figure?”  Him:  “Well the first one came out like mid-90’s!”

Sigh.  This is the point in which a responsible and mature person would keep their mouth shut.  What does it matter if he’s wrong?  Well . . . it matters to me.

Me:  “Um . . . no, actually the first one came out in the late 80’s.”

Him:  “No, the first one was like 1996!”

Sigh.  I knew I was right.  I remember not being allowed to watch the first one with my new step family, with whom I was joined in 1989.  But I could see that debating with him further would be ultimately pointless, so I let it go.  Painfully, but I did let it go.  But rest assured if he were someone I were closer with, I wouldn’t have.

This also goes for logical fallacies.  Actually, it goes primarily for logical fallacies.  And when you’re someone who has the hardest time in the world seeing a logical fallacy and shrugging it off, comment sections on the internet are the WORST places for you to be.  I try to stay away . . . but they’re like crack!  Sweet, emotion-riling crack.

Recently there was an article about how Iran was restricting acedimic studies which they deemed “western” and would only allow subjects that they, an Islamic-based government, deemed okay.  Most of the comments were related to the story, but twenty to forty percent of them that I saw were some kind of stab at religion, in general, and more than half of those were directed right at Christianity:

The christians fighting to destroy seperation of state and church should be forced to live in Iran. Then MAYBE they can see why we wouldn’t want the same thing.

The funny (or not so funny) thing is that the American Christian Taliban is doing the same thing. Trying to deny scientific fact in the light of neo-‘Christianist’ dogma. Trying to suppress truth, history and the facts surrounding the violence inherent in the spread of Christianity, et cetera.  No difference.

hey all of you anti-islam nuts you do realize that islam split off from the jewish faith just like christianity.

Every time I read articles like these, I can’t help to notice the similarities between the radical Muslims and the radical Christians here in America. They are fundamentally the same! Only names change.

I got over arguing directly against claims like these a long time ago.  What I struggle with now is the contradiction in their hearts.  This is best explained via my comment:

How funny that so many people LEAPED at the opportunity to bash Christians in a story about oppressive Islamic governments.  You have a prejudice. If you had no prejudice, your reaction would have been 100% about the Iran government and not an excuse to complain about something entirely unrelated.  If you insist that they ARE related, then let me reiterate my point that you have a prejudice.

You and I could go round and round about whether or not I should have said anything, but that’s not why we’re here.  We’re actually here because of the responses I got to that.

“6” said, “Show me one person without prejudice and I’ll show you a liar. .”  Well I guess that settles it, right?  Everyone has prejudice in some fasion, so all this prejudice is justifiable.  Problem solved.

Watch out for that puddle of sarcasm I left back there.

How about another one?  “XC” said, “It’s funny how so many people LEAPED at the opportunity to bash liberals when this story is totally unrelated. Hypocrite much?”  I want you, as my reader, to PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE tell me what part of my comment up there was bashing liberals.  I’m at a loss.

And now for my favorite one, from screenname “What?Why?”:

You assume that we assumed.
You are prejudging us to be discriminatory of others.

Ready? FIGHT!!  What?Why? uses “Poor Logic!”  “Poor Logic” causes Braden to perform a self-attacking DOUBLE FACEPALM!!!  CRITICAL HIT!!!  BRADEN HAS BEEN K.O.’D!!!

This guy got plenty of thumbs up on that response, too, which tells us that there are more people out there who think that he made sense.

I assumed that he assumed?  What did I assume?  I saw comments bashing Christians and saying that all Christians want to oppress the world with creationism and prayer in schools after an article about the Iranian Islamic government.  I’ll ask again–what did I assume?  And I “prejudged” them to be discriminatory of others?  What does that even mean?  How does one “prejudge” someone else when they point out something they just did?

This is the kind of stuff that gets me the most.  And it eats at me that I can’t find that guy and sit him down and explain to him how what he said was, well, moronic.  Which is what keeps this comment section cycle spinning . . .