Everyone loves a good rant, but Gizmodo writer Joel Johnson delivers a particularly scathing rebuke to readers and commenters who are often a little self righteous and overly personal when disagreeing with an article. The colorful verbal lashing from Johnson might be considered beyond the pale by some, though. Here's a bit from a section entitled "You Don't Get To Call Us Unprofessional," where the writer questions the readers' intelligence:
It goes like this: 1) We put up a post you don't like. 2) Rather than ignoring the post and enjoying a different post—or in the worst case deciding you do not enjoy the mix of stories of Gizmodo any longer and going somewhere else—you decide to express your dissatisfaction. 3) You accuse us of being unprofessional, typically without any clear indication by which standards of professionalism we are being judged.
To be fair, you are very stupid. When presented with something that does not match your very rigid preconceptions of what should entertain you this very second, you lash out with the all the weaponry at your disposal, spitting flechettes of feeble cruelty at the slightest provocation. If you could, when presented with your french fries on the left side of the plastic tray and not the obviously superior right side, you would reach across the counter and give the cashier's nipples a hard twist. And then call him unprofessional.
But the most disturbing part is about the author suffering a horrible trauma that he shared with readers, who later use it against him when they don't disagree with him over some story, or issue, or company:
So I was raped when I was a kid by a parent and I wrote about it. In case you're wondering: It f*cking sucked, but I'm much better, thank you.
But when I got into a scuffle with some commenters last week they decided to take something I'd written about that experience and use it to suggest to Brian Lam that I have anger issues. They were concerned for me, you see. They suggested therapy for my unresolved issues.
I do have anger issues, you dumb, cruel,, entitled, tunneled vision shit eaters. My anger issues are with you, because you are so foul, so unable to use the internet as a thoroughfare for human compassion or—Christ—even just a civil conversation. It's so far beyond your comprehension that perhaps you are rude or simply wrong that you'd dredge up something that has absolutely no bearing on—wait for it—arguments about gadgets.
Read the whole thing, and before you go off half-cocked and comment, understand that the story is about people going off half-cocked and commenting..