How to Be a Bad Commenter

As I've often mentioned, this site has attracted some of the most insightful, persuasive, and informed commenters to be found on the Internet. Les, Travelingal, Jim, XO and several others have added depth, perspective and correction when I've needed it.

What a bunch of slow-learning boneheads! That's not how you're supposed to comment on a blog! Get with the program!

To help my somewhat backward commenting friends catch up to the state of the commenting art, here are 5 simple rules that will help you participate at the level being propagated elsewhere:

1. Use ad hominem attacks, you moron! Attack, attack, attack. There is no technique to be found that rivals the simplicity and elegance of the ad hominem attack. Elaborate, painstakingly wrought masterpieces of logic and evidence crumble into dust when you point out that the author is a "douchebag" or a "retard". And it's universal - it can be used in any argument at any time on any topic against any author. Best of all, it lowers the tone of an argument to a level where we all feel a little more comfortable. Thinking is a pain in the neck, and research is out of the question for a busy commenter, but namecalling is always within reach.

2. Make stuff up! It is much harder to disprove a falsehood than it is to make one up. Use this flaw in the marketplace of ideas to your advantage. On the national stage, this device has been mastered by economists and Republicans to a breathtaking extent. 87.9 percent of economic statistics are made up on the spot. Hillary stiffed a waitress in Iowa. John Kerry claimed he invented the internet. Who cares about the truth when you can make up better stories? Locally, Mainstream is probably the best practitioner of this tactic - study and learn from a master.

3. Logic is meant to be twisted, so make a few pretzels! Make outlandish connections and leaps, and don't fear the chasm of ridiculousness. You're a commenter, so rules of logic don't need to apply to you, and there are no negative consequences at all. Say, for example, that I put a post up arguing that Priest Holmes should have been given more carries. While there are many potential responses to this (remember, ad hominem and make stuff up so far!), a logic bender will point out that I don't care about Darfur, because I think that all black men ought to be made to carry footballs for my entertainment. A clever application of this technique will have the original author responding to arguments about African militia without even realizing how he got there. This technique is by far the most entertaining to observe when effectively used.

4. Demand Research. Bloggers make staggering sums of money off of your readership, so you should make them work for it. If I point out that the Iraq war is costing us vast sums of money, a proper user of this technique would respond along the lines of "Show me how much new money was spent on tracer rounds for rifles used by the 21st battalion during the seige of Camelville between March and June of 2006. And then compare that to the population of the United States as projected in 2012." This is similar to making stuff up, but it makes the original author look like he or she knows less than you do.

5. Never, ever, under any circumstances, admit that you were wrong. The problem with each of the above techniques is that they can be refuted if the original writer is determined and industrious. Every now and then, you will so frustrate a writer that he or she will go ahead and put in the effort to prove you wrong. The secret in such a case is to never give the writer the satisfaction of acknowledging you're wrong. Instead, simply disappear, change the subject, or toss in a final ad hominem. Remember, you're an anonymous or pseudonymous commenter - you have no need to defend your dignity or integrity. Just move onto the next thread, employ the same techniques, and perform the same service of dumbing down and distracting the conversation. Rational, informed discourse is the enemy, and you are well-armed to defeat it.