OK, he didn’t actually link me, but the acknowledgement of my existence is not a trivial thing. On the 4 millionth hit post, Smitty’s buddy Jeff Weimer commented:
Now if we can get Allahpundit to start linking you, we’ll get that slump licked. You may be getting close – he actually mentioned you by name a couple days ago in a comment.
To which I replied:
What? When? Where?
Please send me the link, that is, if you can get your team of legal experts to authenticate it Will Folks-style.
And Jeff directed me to the Wednesday post in which Allah took on Larry Marchant’s claim of a sexual affair with Nikki Haley and received blowback from commenter “WoosterOH”:
Allah’s comment reads:
You’re sick of my “garbage” in scoffing at a story that’s already been scoffed at by Red State and R.S. McCain, among others? Either you’re too dumb to understand the posts or you’re such a blind troll that you’ll complain even when I’m on your side. Regardless, though, I have great news: You’re not required to read the site. Find another.
Which is an excellent chapter in How To Deal With Trolls. There is such a thing as honest disagreement and such a thing as constructive criticism, and then there is trolling, wherein the commenter is essentially engaged in bandwidth piracy.
Life Is Too Short
It’s like when you get one of those annoying hostile guests on a TV talk show who start interrupting the host and trying to filibuster, so that there’s a lot angry crosstalk. The hostile guest has forgotten that he is a guest — he has been invited on by the host, whose show it is and who can invite on anyone he wishes. So the hostile guest is trying to usurp the host’s prerogative, to hijack the discussion and get across his own talking points without regard for the fact that the host doesn’t want to hear that crap.
Such rudeness spoils the show and embarrasses the host — which is, after all, the bad guest’s objective.
So, too, with the troll who, ignoring the fact that his comments are appearing on someone else’s bandwidth, attempts to sabotage the very purpose of the blog or begins derogating the blog itself. The regular readers of any blog — and especially the commenters — generally share some commonality of viewpoint, and their most important shared belief is that the blog itself is a worthwhile endeavor.
If you think the blog sucks and the bloggers is an idiot, why even bother to read it? Life is too short, and it is especially too short to waste your time putting snarky derogatory comments on someone else’s post, arguing to the effect that their work is completely worthless.
If you’re such a damned genius connoisseur of blogospheric excellence, get your own damned blog!
Call your blog “Allahpundit Sucks” or “Banned Hot Air Troll,” if that makes you happy, but don’t hang around spoiling the fun for everybody else. Allah puts up with a lot of snarky grousing in the comments — about his atheism and his fondness for Meghan McCain, among other things — but leniency ought not be mistaken for license, nor should mercy be mistaken for weakness.
Blogging involves an implicit fee-for-service contract between writer and reader. The writer is providing not merely his own work, but linking to the work of others and, by allowing comments, provides a sort of community forum wherein the readers can extend the discussion.
Stomped in the Parking Lot
While I despise the pompous expression “online community,” it nevertheless contains a truth. The relationship between a blogger and his regular readers (many of whom, it should be noted, are also bloggers in their own right) is like the relationship between a bar owner and his clientele. The bar is open to everyone, but if someone starts making a scene that spoils the fun for everyone else, the unruly patron will be shown to the door (and customarily stomped senseless in the parking lot by the bouncers, as was the policy at one nightclub where I worked as a DJ many years ago).
Or, to employ another analogy, think of a Protestant church. The doors are open to all sinners who seek the Lord. But the church has a membership — it is a community of believers — and a Baptist church won’t put up with someone whose only purpose for attending is to scoff at the doctrine of salvation by faith or to derogate the divinity of Christ.
Baptists don’t usually stomp non-believers in the parking lot, however.
At any rate, Allah’s response to the troll was altogether righteous. I don’t know who “WoosterOH” is, and he might actually be a nice guy, but if he doesn’t like the blog, why is he reading it?
As for Allah’s invocation of my name, it’s pretty cool to be cited along with Red State as a bellwether of what is acceptable subject matter for conservative bloggers. And the controversy in the South Carolina GOP primary is can’t-look-away fascinating. At first, I treated it as a joke, but then it became more and more serious.
Whatever your opinion of the controversy, this unruly tumult in South Carolina is unquestionably newsworthy, and a current-events blog can’t be expected to ignore a big story just because it may be bad news for the good guys. Frankly, however, my optimistic hope is that South Carolinians are sick and tired of these slimeball mercenary consultants trying to play kingmaker in the state GOP — which is the real backstory of the Will Folks saga — and will vote for Nikki Haley in a resounding rejection of the disgusting smears against her.
And guess what? Nikki’s surging in the latest poll:
Nikki Haley hasn’t suffered any damage whatsoever after accusations of multiple extramarital affairs and is headed for an easy first place finish in Tuesday’s Republican primary for Governor of South Carolina.
Haley has a 20 point lead, getting 43% of the vote. Gresham Barrett looks like the favorite for the second runoff spot. He’s at 23%, followed by Henry McMaster at 16%, and Andre Bauer at 12%.
Two weeks ago Haley held a 21 point lead in the race. Since then she’s gained 4 points . . .
Only 13% of voters believe the allegations about Haley’s marital infidelity. 54% flat out do not believe them and 33% are unsure.
STAND UP FOR NIKKI HALEY!
