User blog comment:Sloopernicus/The Shallowness of the Jeff the Killer Fandom/@comment-5239282-20140503024933/@comment-5239282-20140504182845

I’m well aware, lol. The winking/laughing face should’ve been a dead giveaway it was “satire.”

I don’t think I was judging at all, though. I’d like to think I’m stating my opinion; my opinion being I thought we were done with these comments, whether from the fandom or from another external force that critiques the story/fandom. I made that judgment a long time ago, and it includes blogs such as yours.

That said, I don’t really aim for much in a blog post. In fact, I don’t see a point in blogs other than to bullshit. I like to bullshit a lot, so it’s never a question of popularity/”does this warrant a conversation?” It’s something I like to do once in a while, and a lot of the times it’s one-off (ie, I forget about it the very next day). It may be considered misuse, but I don’t find any other function in blogs w/ forums at-hand. Which is why I don’t think that functions as a valid point. You wouldn’t know any better, so I’ll let you off on that one. Sorry. ;p

I wasn’t trying to act like some form of higher being, either; all I said was that it was a while ago (a month is a while ago IMO) and there was no need to bring it up. In my mind, there isn’t, but at least you explained your move. In fact, that should convey the exact opposite: I’m embarrassed of my previous actions. But never mind that.

I rarely ever get upset. What I expected wasn’t a simple yes or no response, but a response that would dissect my words and ultimately come to a conclusion: Are comments like these really necessary, now that Jeff is waning in popularity? It’s a different approach to what everybody else comments here, but I think it’s interesting enough to debate. I would like to, anyway. ;p

I define the action of condemning your “opponent” while bringing up their past actions as old and tired. It’s easy and cheap, but not very effective. Since it’s not a very extensive method, wouldn’t it be shallow? Sorry if it’s not what you were going for in your own definition. ;p

You don’t really “aim” for credibility unless your work is objective – not the case here. Still, most if not all blog-writers on CPW and otherwise should theoretically maintain some sort of credibility, typically from their previous works on-site.

I feel such a biting response is really unwarranted, though; especially when I complimented your cognitive process in my original comment. A bit defensive, is all.

Ultimately, I’m sorry if I came across sort of forceful. I didn’t mean to. Although I’d like to think I have enough site experience (two years; chances are more than you have, though I don’t know) to have the reputation of an authority figure.