- Joined
- Feb 9, 2013
There basically is none. For that specific reason, I only distinguish "funny" and "not funny". My criticism of newer trolling is that it isn't very funny.I've really never seen the difference between what you do and what those that came after attempt.
Well ideally, anyway.Its all poking an exceptional individual to see what he does.
The theatrics of Clyde Cash and Liquid made it less about experimenting with Chris' behavior (actually, not at all about experimenting with Chris' behavior) and using him as a comedic actor in a scripted movie. Like getting Robin Williams to voice the comic relief in your disney cartoon.
I think I still have the most accurate understanding of Chris out there.I've said before I think your theories on Chris's behavior, while rationally presented, are not the gold standard anymore.
But again, I must emphasize this is not because I'm particularly clever. It's because I literally have just listened to more chris material than probably anyone. That's it. To me, Chris has essentially been a podcast (one of several) that I've left running in the background for years.
You can't help but notice some patterns. Chris is incredibly repetitive.
I've described moments where my predictions have failed. My big one was that my "Chris can't be trolled online" prediction depended on Chris not having a reason to return to the internet. I never foresaw Chris' bullshit becoming so financially lucrative, that he'd be constantly exposed to a stream of dipshits wanting to pay for the privilege to whisper sweet nothings in his ear.
That threw me for a loop.
I don't remember ever denouncing trolling itself. If I did, or if I gave that impression, that was really not my intention.It didn't mesh with your public facing denouncement of trolling. I don't judge people who troll. I've got an issue with inconsistencies.
I'm pretty careful to phrase my critiques about new trolls in terms of why they aren't funny. Because that's really what's important to me.
Personally, I don't like people trolling Chris for various reasons, but that's obviously not an argument to use here, especially not coming from me.
So I focus on things they fucked up.
I also don't entirely agree with the softening of the community. These sadists exist because the old guard enabled it. There would be no reason to bother Chris if we hadn't made Chris an interesting target.
I think it's important to consider the stakes are substantially different.I reckon I don't understand the push to out these new guys when so many people could have equally had their lives ruined were Chris to have had support back then.
When this all started, Chris was a spry young man in his late twenties. Both his parents were alive. They weren't poor. Chris was fed and taken care of.
It's still mean to fuck with an autistic, but there's a big difference when you're fucking with a vulnerable person in a vulnerable situation (like Chris nowadays), compared to fucking with a vulnerable person (who, at the time everyone believed was full of himself and an asshole) in a very comfortable situation.
I think people expect hearty laughs to justify it nowadays. Because of the issue of hypocrisy, few people are willing to outright say "fucking with Chris is wrong", but it's just been getting more and more pathetic.
Kinda like how activist groups leech sane members when the big goals are accomplished. Women's groups win the vote and equal pay, and then everyone normal goes home and only the crazies are left.
Most of the old trolling could be seen equally as criminal as what these guys are doing.
Extortion. Heh, and you make it sound like it's a small line item tacked onto the end. Like idk, you burglarized someone's house, oh, and here's a parking ticket too.The fraud angle only adds to the charges.
It's certainly not equally criminal, if you define "equally criminal" in terms of severity of crime. If you only operate on a binary illegal vs illegal, then yeah, I guess they're equally criminal.
When we're talking about old Chris trolling, most of it was questionably legal or in the gray area. Even if something someone did crossed into actual illegal territory, I think the expense of dealing with a small crime across state lines, without money being involved, makes politics a huge factor in whether prosecutions would go forth. It'd take a very politically savvy prosecutor to justify pursuing what could be described as nerdy kids screeching at other nerdy kids online, like on youtube.
I know it was much more than just nerdy kids screeching on youtube, but I think it'd be harder to sell the reality of the situation to a normal person.
When chunks of money come into the picture, especially when you can conjure up images of little old ladies getting fleeced by nigerian princes, I think that makes the politics easier to navigate.
I believe it.I work in intelligence/cybersecurity. I used to idenfity and build cases on people involved with Chris in my spare cycles to refine my algorithms for identifying people using our LI databases.
You've got a really weird perspective on my opinions on Chris.Basically proves that Chris will continue to be baited until he's doing something gross in the women's restroom, which will land him on the sex offender's registry. Marvin will come to Chris' defense claiming that he should be absolved of any responsibility to no avail.
It's a local mental health center. They have like therapy and shit. I think they're rolling out an in-patient treatment center, but it's not long term. It's like for drug addicts or maybe people undergoing mental breakdowns in the moment.Didn't Null say that Rocky wanted to send him to the nuthouse? Talking to a therapist is the first step in qualifying him for admission to a group home. I'm afraid that all of this will get shuffled and jived until Barb dies, and then the whole roof will fall in and it may be too late by that point.
If Chris shows up, act cogent, jabbers at the therapist for a bit, he'll walk right out.