I really hate the Tireless Rebutter, and I kick myself when I find myself getting wrapped up in one of those endless arguments. I also get really annoyed with Innocence Abused.

Did the list leave anyone out?

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Answers

This probably falls under the category of "tireless rebutter," but I hate those people who seize on a particular word and try to prolong the argument by insisting that "you used this word five posts ago! and then in your most recent post you used this OTHER word! And look, here's the dictionary definition of both words. Clearly, I have now won this argument."

I mean, for cripes' sake, that's not reasoned debate, that's just shee bloody-mindedness.

I also hate The Ad Hominem Attacker. "I believe that the state of American cinema is in total disarray and that there have been no good movies since Gone with the Wind." "Well, I respectfully disagree, and in fact liked Blah Movie, Blah Movie II, and Return of Blah." "Oh, yeah??? Well you don't know a damn thing about cinema and furthermore if you ever pulled your HEAD out of your BUTT you'd agree with me, dipshit!"

Sigh.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Those who bring up irrelevant stuff which you'd thought was buried months ago. Boring snoring!

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Oh - and people who think a dictionary definition of a word is a substitute for a reasoned argument.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Hey, Jan, I didn't know you used to read alt.society.generation-x.

On any forum, I clench my teeth at a) the Duelling Twins who keep going until everyone else has stopped reading - they aren't going to give an inch, aren't going to take it to e-mail, and furthermore have been repeating themselves since the first round; b) the First Amendment Poster Children who slag someone, preferably with old mistakes and personal material gleaned from other threads, and then claim the person is oversensitive for wanting to defend themself in the same forum they're being slagged in instead of taking it to e- mail; c) the Credentialed Snobs in whatever is being discussed, who start with "Sheesh, for God's sake, if you'd ever made a movie or even read a book, you ignorant cretin, you'd know that Star Wars is really about Hegel, not Freud, and so is Earth Girls are Easy." It's not the display of knowledge, which I enjoy - it's the attitude.

Oh, and anyone with no sense of humor, oh, and stalkers but that's for another thread.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

That site is hilarious! Thanks for linking to it!

"The Rat" frequents a newsgroup I visit often, though he's been quiet lately. Last month featured a gang-bang flamefest against him for quoting a private email he recieved to a public board. He often misattributes and misquotes people's statements, so if you are so stupid to reply you have to spend several paragraphs correcting his attributions and quotes before you get to the main point.

I see myself as a "Profundus Maximus" whose grammar, spelling and organization-of-thought is goddamn pathetic, and whose choice of vocabulary makes me look like a poser, rather than making me look intelligent.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

If the Arbiter is the same person who scolds everyone for flaming, then that's my least favorite one. Everyone's having a good old time, duking it out, and then someone gets on and posts, "I can't believe ADULTS are fighting like this," or "You're all behaving immaturely" or whatever. I always want to say, "Okay, thanks, Mom. Now fuck off."

I think most people who enjoy flamewars do so because it's an emotional release. You can't expect a person to have a mature, adult, emotional release. At least, I don't think you should.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

I love an intense debate, particularly when the parties involved are intelligent and informed, but hate it when the commentary turns nasty and personal. I am always willing to consider a different opinion from my own, and I don't understand why people get so angry when you disagree with them.

As for the worst type of flame warrior? Hands down, the people who enjoy picking a fight just for the hell of it - or those who swoop down on a forum as soon as they hear it's gotten nasty and start attacking.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

oh ... now I see ... there's a model list of categories ... the task wasn't to make them up ... note to me: rtwf (read the weblog first)...

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Oh, Diana, that is so cool. You've given me a new catch phrase (mostly to use with Jeremy), only I'm going to change it to RTFW.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

The Tireless Rebutter is indeed tiresome.

I personally hate the Infant Provacateur, not so much for his idiotic posts as for the fact that some people (Tireless Rebutters?) simply cannot ignore his posts, and must get into a flame war that draws others in. Then they get mad at people who say "You know he's an asshole who's just trying to get a rise out of you, why do you respond to him?" and it goes on and on.

I also hate people who come along and say "why can't we all act reasonable here - I can't believe how childish everyone is acting." Like that ever made anyone say "Whoah. You're right. I'm going to stop posting right now."

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Can't say I like any of them, though I must admit to having been each one at some time or another. Oh, the shame.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Flamers that can't spell or use basic grammar. Here they are, trying to prove how intelligent they are, and they can't form a sentence without butchering the English language, It's one thing if the person isn't an anglophone, because you can sort of forgive that-- it's not their native tongue. But if it's someone who's been speaking English their whole lives, but they pluralize words apostrophes (bad, bad, BAD!!!) or use the wrong form of there, their or they're, then I really can't take them seriously. Proofread, people. It's a wonderous tool.

Sorry. That's one of my pet peeves. I studied journalism, and I'm a little anal about correct grammar and spelling.

The other flamers that piss me off are people who quote the Bible at me. Don't. I'm not Christian, and Bible quotes aren't proof of anything if I don't believe in them. I once got into a discussion about paganism with a Baptist minister (I was doing a project for class), and whenever I asked him to tell me why he had such-and-such an oppinion, or what he thought about this or that, he'd throw Bible quotes at me, without putting them into any form of context. I wanted to ask him if he had any oppinions of his own, or if he'd been pre- programmed.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

I've got a new one to add to the list: "the psychologist," who attempts to skewer his or her attackers by saying that they must be mentally unbalanced.

There was a brilliant article in The New Yorker a couple of months ago about Rudy Giuliani, who uses this tactic all the time. The author suggested that Giuliani's habit of dismissing his detractors as crazy might reflect the mayor's doubts about his own sanity, which does indeed seem tenuous from time to time.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

So... is anyone going to say which Flame Warrior they most resemble?

I'll go first. I'm definitely an "Arbiter." I can find a hundred ways to piss off those who like to get into flame wars by posting long, rambling messages about how we should all just get along.

Sometimes, I'll even include a parable. Must be some sort of Jesus complex.

Tedious? You bet! Even to myself.

So what kind of Flame Warrior are YOU?

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Holy catfish - this whole thing just about unmans me. It seems to me that I exhibit characteristics of each one. So, "can't we all get along ?" being one of my bad habits. I just go somewhere else now. Maybe to another topic on that forum or - maybe to somewhere else, maybe not to return. Maaaaa, he made me do it !

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Hey, Patrick! I already did say which one I am! :-) It's up there - I'm "Profundus Maximus".

And I think Diana's "Duelling Twins" is a good one, too. My pet- peeve "Rat" attracts a "Twin" who feels the need to argue with every single one of the Rat's messages. Argh.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

I think they left one out - The Knee Jerk Reactionary. You know, the one that keeps some list of people they love to hate, and as soon as someone on that shit list posts *anything*, they leap down and start flaming them, no matter how innocous the original post was. You've seen it. Someone posts to a mailing list about how they will be in Dallas in March, and can anyone recommend something fun and touristy to do while they are there, and the Knee Jerk Reactionary will jump in and post something about how they won't be able to see very much, since their head is stuffed up their arse.

-- Anonymous, May 19, 2000

Well, speaking as someone who probably falls under the Arbiter category, I'm afraid I can only say "fuck you very much" to people who find my vain attempts to get them to act like rational adults annoying. Yes, I know it's a useless struggle, but somehow I just can't stop myself. And as long as there's a flame war going on, if I'm not participating in it then I'll be there shouting at everyone to just get over it and love one another, etc. It's characteristic of the Arbiter type that they never take no for an answer and never go away. So NYERH if you don't like that, cos you're stuck with me :) (at least until Beth pulls a Mike Leung on me and tells me to never come back, whereupon I will just have to have flame wars with the voices in my head).

As for the ones who get up my nose, that would have to be the Tireless Rebutter, the Royals, and the Weenie (who annoy me no end in real life as well as on the Net). I'll be interested to see what this guy says about the other ones he hasn't written up yet

-- Anonymous, May 20, 2000

James, fuck you too, sweetie (, unless you didn't mean me, in which case I take back that "fuck you" and save it for someone else.)

Okay, I thought of another new one. The Freudian. That's the guy who always accuses people of sexual motives. You know... if you dislike someone, it's because you secretly want to have sex with him. If you're angry, it's because you're sexually frustrated. Stuff like that.

-- Anonymous, May 20, 2000

I guess I'm The Philosopher. Not quite as pompous as Profundus Maximus, but always slow to anger and will tend to get on the intellectual side of things. Usually what I say is not intense enough to generate any commentary, so I wonder if the message ever got out there at all.

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2000

I guess I'd be the Runaway. As soon as Dave Van or Mike Leung posts twice, I just stop reading. (Thanks, Beth. I would have missed the Xeney forums.) :-)

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2000

OMG - That was a riot! Thanks for sharing. [Is it me or do those sketchs look like court drawings we see on the news time to time?]

And to answer your question 'The Rat' and 'List Sisters' are the most annoying. I just ignore the 'Tireless Rebutter' and the responses he/she generate, which sadly eliminates most posts.

Oh, and since someone else asked...
Now to think about it - for the positive or the negative aspect of it all I would have to fall under the label 'The Royals'.

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2000

I would have to say the Tireless Rebutter and Diana's Dueling Twins irritate me the most and then the Faux Therapist is up there too.

As to who I am, I am constantly tempted to be the arbiter- the one who comes in to explain to everyone what it is that everyone else is saying, get everything clarified and so end the war.

Since I know that doesn't work I usually resist, but sometimes it is sooo hard. :)

-- Anonymous, May 21, 2000

Gwen, the "fuck you sweetie" is gratefully received. I'll put it in storage and see that it gets put to good use the next time we all erupt into a flame war. And yes, Freudians annoy the hell out of me too. I did five years of film studies at university, I know the barbaric extremes to which some theorists will go to score a Freudian point. As someone said recently at a newsgroup I frequent recently said, "sometimes a penis is just a penis". No reason why there should be any sexual connotations laid on at all

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000

James, you're just saying that because you secretly want me.

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000

O.K., you two! Quit arguing! (Or 'Take it off-line', etc)

Dean as "Arbiter" today

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000

Ha!

I wouldn't mind being the Kung Fu Master. It was cool that the guy included him.

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000

I have to say, I like them all. Freaks appeal to me, perhaps because I am one myself, and the web wouldn't be any fun if it weren't inhabited by a wide variety of weirdos. The nice thing about the web is the total lack of danger. You can converse with the pervert and the wacked-out everything-hater, and still shut them off neatly, be home in time for dinner and be relatively secure that no one is tailing you there. I've never gotten so tired of a flame warrior in any forum that I couldn't solve things by reading some other thread.

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000

To alter focus slightly, who is everyone's favourite (or least favourite) flame warrior? I.e. the individual person, not the type? I'll nominate a guy who lurks around another message board I frequent called "Bob" that's his screen name, at least; his real surname is Child, which neatly sums up the quality of his flames. He runs the website for a band here called Area 7, and the fact that hardly anyone else on the board likes them is the source of his venom. In person he's probably a sensible, rational being, but on the Net he can be one of the most obnoxious and vituperative little bastards I've encountered. He really has no idea what a disservice he does to himself when he goes on a rant. Terribly tedious. And yet I like him because he's such an easy target to strike back at.

So who are other people's (least) favourites?

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000

And Gwen, it's like you read my mind. I'll be round with the marriage licence later.

-- Anonymous, May 22, 2000