Interlude: What Won't You Write About?

71 Comments

Charles • Sep 5, 2012 @8:52 am

I had a pretty doofy wedding-planning blog that petered out after a few months because fans of my wife's earlier work just couldn't understand why someone would want a WEDDING. The comments got gradually worse and the fun of writing waned.
eddie • Sep 5, 2012 @8:55 am

AWWWW LOOK AT THE PUPPY DOG !!!!
Globex Corporation • Sep 5, 2012 @8:56 am

There are many things that I write about, but I do it all under a psuedonym as I don't want people to associate my personal views with my firm (where I am a junior associate).

This was a particular concern of my previous firm where I often voiced strong opinions against the current government in my province while my firm was in the habit of making routine and large donations to the political party forming government.
Thad • Sep 5, 2012 @8:58 am

I've picked up a couple minor, incompetent stalkers over the years, so I make sure my home address never gets tied to my name on the Internet, and I don't generally mention names of family members.

I've also taken to not mentioning when I'm going to be out of town for the weekend or at a show or what-have-you, but that's not because of any specific paranoia so much as security best-practices.
bw1 • Sep 5, 2012 @9:01 am

I think I would draw the line at personally identifying my family and friends, by name, picture, or other unambiguous reference. They didn't necessarily sign on for the flak that comes with it. The web can be war-like, and they are non-combatants.

I enjoy the stories about your kids, but their names and likenesses don't add anything to the stories, and there are people out there who might use that information in ways we don't even want to imagine.
Dan Irving • Sep 5, 2012 @9:03 am

Ken – sucks that this has impacted you this way. Unfortunately that seems to be the way of the interwebs. Not being able to shove your fist down some moron's piehole when they say something offsides gives trolls an inflated sense of worth. They lack the intellectual capacity to accept alternate pov's and the emotional development required to empathize with their fellow travellers. I personally blame the 60's.
Jonathan Kamens • Sep 5, 2012 @9:06 am

I wrote on my blog a couple years ago about problems my wife had with a hospital. I made the mistake of mentioning her primary care physician by name, and a while after that, some crazy guy showed up at her PCP's office waving printouts of my blog postings, identifying my wife and her PCP by name, and forcefully insisting that he simply had to speak with my wife's doctor. It was very scary. I try to be a bit more careful not about eliding stuff when I post.
Shylock Holmes • Sep 5, 2012 @9:20 am

That sucks, man. Trolls – ruining the fun for all of us.

My guess is that part of the difficulty is the transition from pseudonymous writing, to pseudo-pseudonymous writing, to 'When I type "Who is [pseudonym]?" in Google, my name comes up.' The amount of personal detail you'll reveal is generally decreasing from one case to the next, as presumably would be the number of off-color jokes, politically incorrect rants, ad hominem attacks on random public figures, and all sorts of other stuff that's entertaining to read, but not entertaining to explain to your boss or mother. But unfortunately, everything you wrote when you thought it was all totally anonymous is still completely searchable once your name (and State Bar address for filing complaints) becomes known. As Bob Dylan put it in his autobiography – privacy is something you can sell, but never buy back.

I ended up at the policy of 'write under a pseudonym, try to conceal your identity, but choose what you write under the assumption that you'll be outed anyway'. But within that limit, push the boundaries a little, because otherwise what's the fun in the whole thing?
princessartemis • Sep 5, 2012 @9:20 am

It isn't in the same sphere as blogging, but I no longer use certain instant messaging software nor do I present as female in most online social venues due to the completely random harassment I've received.

If I ever were to blog, there are subjects close to my interests I would avoid simply because I can see what sort of commentary it invites when others do so, and I know I'm not up to handling that much hostility. Apparently, people deeply invested in anatomically absurd women in video games, comic books, and fantasy games feel really strongly about how important it is they stay that way.
Dwight Brown • Sep 5, 2012 @9:21 am

For the most part, I do not write about my workplace, even if the information has been reported elsewhere. I know some of my cow orkers read my blog (because they've told me so), and I like having a job and getting a paycheck. But that's not so much due to my personal experience as it is seeing what's happened to other people.

I don't discuss my personal religious beliefs, for what I consider to be good (and personal) reasons.

I know my mother reads my blog as well: I can't think of anything that I've censored myself from discussing because of that, but I have been trying to tone down my usage of profanity for that reason.
Valerie • Sep 5, 2012 @9:31 am

In 2008, I wrote what I thought was a pretty unexciting comment about the election in The Guardian's comment section. Within minutes, several people were commenting that I was asking to be anally raped by the paper's editors and readers (their language was more colorful, but you get the gist).

The article I commented on was about how foreigners could influence the US election & help elect someone they would prefer to work with (in 2004, the Guardian had their readers call voters in Ohio – didn't work).

All I said was calls from strangers in England were unlikely to go down well with American swing voters. What that has to do with anal rape, I am not sure, although I have since noticed trolls have something of an obsession with it.

It was disconcerting, to put it mildly, but I've still generally used my actual name to comment and included some personal details if relevant. If I ran an actual blog, I might be more circumspect since it gives people a clearer target than 1 comment among many.

Anyway, Ken, I hope your hiatus ends soon & that you can take legal action against whatever asshat decided to contact your employer. Call Chuckles – I hear he specializes in "raputation" now.
The Curmudgeon • Sep 5, 2012 @9:31 am

I blog anonymously and under my real name. Among other things, family stuff goes in the anonymous blog — and, even there, I'm careful not to give away too many details that might lead to my unmasking.

I hope you won't be too long away — I'm selfish and shallow and I enjoy your work — but I understand, respect and sympathize with your reasons.
John • Sep 5, 2012 @9:40 am

It's sort of funny… All last week and into this one, I was thinking, "Gee, I wish Ken and Patrick would write more often." Then I stopped to think, "Gee, they're probably doing their real jobs. There are people who need their legal services far more than I need to be educated/entertained by reading what they write in their spare time."

The trolls, though… they can be spooky, they can be dangerous, and sometimes, they can just be fun to pull the legs and wings off. But because I can't tell which is which based on a comment, I try to avoid much in the way of personal information about my family, even though I write under my real name. I also rejoice that I live in a state with a "Must Issue" ruling on CCW.
ktpick • Sep 5, 2012 @9:44 am

I write a tiny family blog. I do it for myself mostly, I want to remember the funny, cute, endearing things that my kids do while they're little. I actually print it out each year into a hardcover book so I can look at it later without ring online. I don't really expect much commentary on it since it is probably about as interesting as a strangers vacation pictures to other people.

That said, I was extremely taken aback to find out that my inlaws *keep score* of how many times I talk about my own parents versus themselves. I have never once said anything negative about anyone but I do sometimes talk about my very supportive mother instead of my alcoholic in laws. After a few blowups over this score keeping, I'm now very careful to try and balance it more though I don't write positive things about the inlaws that I don't feel are true. It's kind of ruined the fun for me lately and posts have dried up.

As for rules of posting online, I do reference my kids by their first names and show pictures. I never say anything negative about anyone, and I never post anything that I wouldn't want my grandmother to see. All the same rules I live by on Facebook, google+, and my blog :)
Hal 10000 • Sep 5, 2012 @9:47 am

I refrain from writing about really personal stuff – family health issues and so on. And while it's fairly easy to trace who I am, I like to keep the identifying details to a minimum. Mostly I avoid writing about things I know will start flame wars in the comments: abortion, global warming, etc.
Graham Shevlin • Sep 5, 2012 @10:04 am

I have dialed back on political postings and comments recently, especially on Facebook, as I have realized that this is an intensely polarized country this electoral cycle, and my style of interaction, which is based on questioning and debate, does not play well with people who are already dug into a specific set of positions. Having been called out as "arrogant" and "abrasive" on more than one occasion for pointing out that the people in question were merely stringing together slogans and juvenile ad hominems, and asking for some arguments instead, I tired of that level of sterility. I concluded that it is better to refrain from discussion with people whose minds are already welded shut, and instead to frequent other places (like Popehat) where I can encounter a different level of comment and discussion.
angstela • Sep 5, 2012 @10:05 am

For a number of years I was paranoiacally private. I moderate a play-by-post RPG forum (think slow-moving games of D&D, GURPS, &c.) and have had users with their own particular axes to grind over moderaton decide, for example, that a great way to annoy me is by annoying my retired parents. But I'm slipping back toward the side of "no matter how obsessively private I am, obsessive whackjobs are still going to find a way to get to me, having that level of keen, hyper-obsessive crazy that out does my fairly average obsessive crazy." Of course none have (yet) made plain death threats, so that could change.
d-day • Sep 5, 2012 @10:12 am

I had a blog many years ago that I thought was totally anonymous, until a reader sent a link to my personal profile on my company's webpage with a note "you might want to start covering your tracks better." She meant well, but it was so creepy I gave it up. I wanted to blog about politics and that really would not have gone over well at my old job.

Now I just assume that pseudonymous or not, everything I ever post online will be found. I don't say things about people that I'm not willing to say to their face. Luckily, I'm a jerk, so that's not as restrictive as it could be.
C. S. P. Schofield • Sep 5, 2012 @10:17 am

Please take your time attending to your life. I think I can speak for everyone here worth the oil necessary to fry them in Hell when I say, we'll be here when you get back.

Since writing is the process of staring at a blank page until beads of blood form on one's forehead, I see no reason why you should write so much as one word you don't want to.

I WAS a little concerned, but mostly in a vague "I hope everything is OK, especially with family" sense, which this puts to rest.
Grifter • Sep 5, 2012 @10:25 am

I agree with C.S.P. Schofield (and everybody else)…you'll be missed, but we'll be here!

On the subject of speaking on the internet: I refuse to be intimidated out of speaking unless there's a direct threat to Mrs. Grifter that could come as a result. I am perfectly willing to stick my neck out, but hers is not up for grabs. Thus, I almost always feel fully free to speak my mind… to a point. Of course, that also means I've been barred from more than a few places IRL and online.
Tim • Sep 5, 2012 @10:27 am

I miss the regular Ken insights, but that's my personal problem. I don't mind the hiatus because what Ken is doing in real life is giving him new experiences, perspective, and insights to write about in the future. Who wants to read the insights of a person that doesn't live in the world but only looks upon it from a distance? Not me. In other news…

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2012/09/05/family-wants-apology-from-police-after-dog-shot-and-killed/
TheOtherMatt • Sep 5, 2012 @11:18 am

Ken:

I know that we are not entitled to your writing, but rest assured what you do here is important, and very much appreciated, if you wanted fund it via kickstarter or something, I'm sure I'm not the only one who would donate. Also if you need inspiration in recent weeks airline security people have been caught discriminating against, and sometimes abusing PWDs not that you need that strictly speaking but i can' t think of anyone more qualified to give the govt and airlines a rhetorical crochshot over irrational prejudice then yourself, well i can but they're all dead is the thing. So bottom line Don't stop :)
Miranda • Sep 5, 2012 @11:39 am

I've missed your writings terribly! David's have been educational, but being so far out of my realm of knowledge, hard for me to understand. But I figured you were actually attending to your life. I sometimes wonder how busy lawyers who are also prolific bloggers (like you, Greenfield, Bennett) blog and have time to do your jobs.

As far as this series of tubes, I think very carefully before writing anything online having to do with feminism or "women's issues," or even where I'm simply giving an opinion as a woman. Although I am a grown-up, the replies I have received (and that other women have received) when posting about those subjects can be especially vitriolic. They get to me, no matter how hard I try to not let it.
M. • Sep 5, 2012 @11:42 am

I believe that nothing on the Internet is ever truly private. Trust no one, etc. However, I do compartmentalize my various personality traits onto different sites – anything really emotional or TMI goes on my LiveJournal, which has a viewership of two very old friends. The bawdy and gallows humor is for Facebook, intellectual stuff mostly goes on G+, and the beauty blather goes on my beauty blog. Not to blow smoke up anyone's ass, but Popehat is probably the closest I come to doing it all in one place.
Orville • Sep 5, 2012 @11:45 am

When my wife was pregnant with our first child routine testing discovered that he had a horrible birth defect that was going to kill him. The only available treatment had an extremely low chance of success and would have resulted in a lifetime of pain. So we decided to let him be born, and then die on his own. It was the hardest decision we have ever had to make. It came very close to destroying our marriage.

My wife, seeking an outlet, blogged about our pain. It was picked up by a religious nut case who made sure everyone at an extreme pro-life forum knew the story.

That's when the death threats started rolling in.

It has been several years since my son died in my arms. I remember that moment every day – and so does the internet. We still get random bits of hate thrown our way by people who don't give two shits that we made the exceedingly painful choice we did because we thought it was the best thing for our child.

The experience taught me two things – always post using a pseudonym and always keep a powerful firearm close by.

Other than that, it hasn't changed my posting habits one bit. Insane people are going to be insane and there is nothing you can do about it except be prepared to defend yourself if their delusions cause them to strike at you outside the internet.

Besides, crawling into a hole and keeping quiet for the rest of my life would be the same as surrendering to those moronic fuck weasels and I refuse to give them that satisfaction.
Kat • Sep 5, 2012 @11:46 am

I no longer write about anything akin to politics, but that one may have been obvious to everyone but me.
Jonathan Kamens • Sep 5, 2012 @11:47 am

In addition to the incident I mentioned above…

Long ago, before there were blogs, or LJ, or Facebook, or anything else like that, at least two different KOTM winners tried to get me fired from my job for things I had posted on Usenet. It wasn't pleasant.

Nevertheless, I've always posted everything I've ever posted anywhere online under my real name, and I have no intention of changing that. Posting anonymously because of the kooks and crazies is letting the terrorists win.
Davey • Sep 5, 2012 @12:42 pm

Ya know… blogging (or any participation in the 'Net) is a lot like busking in a New York subway station:
1. The decision to perform in public has to be weighed very carefully.
2. On good days, you attract an appreciative audience and polite applause.
3. On bad days, all you see are tinfoil hats and a drunk that tries to whiz in your instrument case.

Blogging is public performance. You don't get to choose your audience unless you sell tickets.
Thad • Sep 5, 2012 @1:54 pm

I notice that there is more than one of me, so… this comment is by Thad, who is not to be confused with Thad.

Right. That's cleared that one up :)

Happy Hiatus, Ken … but is one on a hiatus? If so, wouldn't one fall in to it? Should it be in, or having, …or what?
nlp • Sep 5, 2012 @1:56 pm

Several years ago my company hired a summer intern. In the little introduction email that was sent out there was a mention of his blog. A few days later he made some comment about some government proposal; possibly a cap and tax system. He mentioned possible costs and said it was a back of the envelope projected number.

In a company that made its money by consulting on finance, utilities, energy, and related matters, this was a mistake. A day or so later he said (in his blog) that people with other envelopes, bigger, more experienced envelopes, came to other conclusions. It seems that the principals of the company, not content with sending emails, were stopping by his office to explain why his numbers were off.

I'm sure he got a great education that summer, but I suspect it wasn't the education he expected to get.
En Passant • Sep 5, 2012 @2:35 pm

I add my voice to Grifter, C.S.P. Schofield and others above. I miss your posts, Ken. But I recognize the need to attend actually important things. I hope you can return to delight us all with your writings soon.
AlphaCentauri • Sep 5, 2012 @2:57 pm

I had been pleasantly surprised you had as much time as you did before. I know how long it takes to write and edit high-quality blog posts. And I know moderation was probably becoming a chore, what with all our tl;dr posts to read! I'm looking forward to your book.

As far as what I post on line, I try to keep real-name posts and persistent pseudonym posts in separate universes. It's not been 100% successful, but I've avoided most problems. I have no fear of trolls showing up in person, however. They are only brave when they're anonymous and online.
En Passant • Sep 5, 2012 @4:29 pm

AlphaCentauri wrote:

I have no fear of trolls showing up in person, however. They are only brave when they're anonymous and online.

While this is generally true, there are exceptions. My personal experience with one internet loon was quite different. In fact, it (the loon) terrified some of my friends and associates whom it targeted online and physically assaulted in the flesh.

Prosecutions and convictions ensued. Unfortunately it still infests the internet. Some jail time apparently reduced its penchant for physical confrontation a bit, though not for internet loonery.
Basil Forthrightly • Sep 5, 2012 @4:32 pm

I no longer say anything about Scientology on the Internet. Back in the '90s, I got on their enemies list (they distributed Internet-blocking software to their adherents and my name and email were blocking keys), and *someone* was building a dossier on me, contacting folk that knew me in 3 states and the navy.

I also started getting emails from high school girls who needed help on school projects related to things I'd posted about on Usenet or the early web.

It was too creepy and I had plenty of other things to write about.
Robert • Sep 5, 2012 @5:19 pm

I inadvertently became the #1 topic on a now defunct trolling website because I blogged about entertainment media through the lens of my experience working in the industry. I was 18 years old, landing a bunch of big auditions, and was able to write about stories from the lens of someone who had been through it. Cue a trolling website finding my site and accusing me about lying about every detail of my life. I'd post evidence to back me up and that would somehow make me worse.

Then the actual cyber attacks against me started (they got me fired from sites I freelanced for with false allegations against my character and drained my paypal account) and continued for…7 years. What stopped them? Aside from numerous DMCA takedown notices for when they'd copy and paste entire articles I'd written without permission, their site owner got tired of the monthly bill and split without warning.

They absolutely killed my business. I had to shut down my homepage and adopt a pseudonym for non-ghostwriting gigs. I just got up the nerve to put my own site back up in a public forum with my name on it two years ago but now my life is excluded from 99% of my writing. I occasionally mention some of my music work or when I'm so sick that looking at the computer screen causes an instant migraine, but otherwise it's all business.

All of this over reality TV recaps and movie reviews.

I can't blame anyone for taking a break and putting a moratorium on topics if it makes them feel safer and saner. Nothing worse than feeling dread every time you log into the back end of a site.
JWH • Sep 5, 2012 @5:21 pm

I blog infrequently, but when I blog politics or law I make it a rule to take a very intellectual approach, and I never, EVER write while angry.
Elise Logan • Sep 5, 2012 @7:19 pm

There are many things I won't write about/blog about. Some of that is because I'm an author and I don't want to cause people not to buy books because of personal things that have nothing to do with books. That includes things like religion and politics and so on. Another set of things I won't talk about because I'm protective. I don't refer to my kidlet by name or discuss her school or any specifics or particulars about her. I don't discuss personal things which are specifically identifiable for my husband or my family.

So, yes. There are a lot of things I won't blog about or discuss online.

E
Bill • Sep 5, 2012 @7:33 pm

As someone who blogs myself, I realize how time consuming it is. You have to come up with an idea, find a way to say it all in an interesting manner and keep up with it (your posts are quite striking in this regard b/c they it's clear you put a lot of thought into them). Even if you can do it in 20 mins a day, as busy as many of our schedules are, finding a dedicated time to get it done can be a real inconvenience. I agree with the rest… We'll be here when you get back and as much as we miss you, your family no doubt needs you more. Also, as someone who asked for your help, I was really struck by how willing you were to help and can imagine that there're a lot of folks asking for your time. It's tragic that you get hassled (you're a big boy and i'm sure it rolls of your back, but family is a different issue) but we can only hope it never escalates above hot air. Best wishes man, and yep, I'll be waiting with bells on until you come back.
Lucille • Sep 5, 2012 @7:47 pm

I have missed your posts. Peppering your writing with personal details gives a certain credibility to your blog that you are more than a think piece. You're a person, a citizen too. Having said that, I agree with the majority of comments so far. It's just good practice to avoid baiting your hook while sailing uncertain seas. Most of the catch is good, but there are some out there who could ruin the whole trip.
Lucille • Sep 5, 2012 @8:15 pm

Also, I have been enjoying loweringthebar.net. Some of you needing a legal intellect fix with humor might enjoy this site also.
M. • Sep 5, 2012 @10:45 pm

I should add that, several years ago, I showed the Internet my ass in a big way. I did my best to make amends, but ultimately had to beat a hasty retreat into relative anonymity. If someone had that particular debacle in mind, it wouldn't be hard to recognize my writing style and some identifying details and "ruin my life" online; frankly, I would deserve it. For now, though, I try to be a force for good and relative sanity on the Web, while being careful not to chuck the first stone too violently in certain familiar situations.

I also have a naughty little vice called flamebait trolling, but I only target stupid and/or narrowminded people, and only when I'm quite bored or frisky.
Bruce • Sep 5, 2012 @11:16 pm

There's no need to grind out a hobby.

Mostly based on old-timers ennui, I don't bother to write about God or abortion, or even bother with threads where they are the topic. I think I've seen all the arguments both sides have and am happy with where I sit on the issues and do not think anything I say will ever change anyone's mind, nor is anyone likely to reveal something new that would have me rethinking my position.
James Pollock • Sep 6, 2012 @12:24 am

I post almost exclusively with my real name, for several reasons: 1) I don't have to worry about being "found out". 2) I'm not afraid/ashamed to own my opinions/words, and 3) it reminds me to self-moderate, so that IF something I'm involved in devolves into flaming trollfarts, it wasn't ME who started it. Is there a chance I might provoke some online nutjob? Sure… I also live near a volcano and downstream from a big dam (actually, a whole string of them). Life is risky.
Terry Gibbs • Sep 6, 2012 @12:39 am

I realized a few years ago that the stories I tell about my life define me. I decide when an occurrence is something to be shared with others.

I've been attacked frequently online. But those are exceptions.

My experience has been more of people being kind, than people being assholes. My tendency is to think about the few people who behave badly, but they are really a small group.

When my father died in 2007, I wrote about it on my site, and got a 18" stack of cards from readers. These are people who spent the time to get my address and send a card.

I've had readers (not publicists though that happens too!) send me books they thought I'd like.

I've been to shows around the country and had people come up and introduce themselves to me as readers, and thank me.

Those are the people I think about when I write. Not the trolls and quick-to-be-offended.
Windypundit • Sep 6, 2012 @1:49 am

I blog under my own name, but I do avoid giving out personal contact information, financial details, information about my job, or identifying details about my friends and family. I also practice a certain amount of opsec by not revealing some of my plans in advance. Finally, although I don't avoid controversial topics out of fear of trolls, I do follow a strict practice of not feeding the trolls, which includes not writing about them if the only reason to write about them is because they're doing something troll-ish. So far, I haven't had any stalkers.
scaredninny • Sep 6, 2012 @1:49 am

I have, for many years, considered writing about my experience with abortion. I cannot make myself publicly do it- either online or in print- because:

1) I haven't told my family and don't particularly want them to know and assume that its possible that it'll get out even if I write under a pseudonym

2) Don't want to get the hate-mail that I know would ensue. Nor do I want to submit my family to that kind of attention.

3) I can't quite get behind pouring out the painful emotions to a space that I know is not going to be supportive, or at least not judgmental.

I'm actually enough of a scaredycat that this is under a wholly new pseudonym that will probably never be re-used ever again just in case.
Joe • Sep 6, 2012 @4:31 am

Ken, I hope your internet stalker trolls are under control and have retreated back under whatever rock they crawled out from under. I understand the workload issue, I too am on a bit of a hiatus. Q4 is by far our busiest time of the year and I won’t be sleeping much between now and Christmas. Will miss you postings in the interim but am sure your cohorts will do an admirable job of keeping things humming along.

To answer your two questions above:.

(1) Are there things that you won't write about now because of your online experiences? Hasn’t been an issue for me since when I post online it’s always been under a pseudonym and from a spoofed IP. Not because I’m concerned so much about someone discovering my real identity but mostly because I just don’t have the time to engage in a protracted legal wrangling with some asshat that doesn’t understand the first amendment or who got their feelings all butthurt because I posted something they disagreed with.

(2) Have things happened to you online that have made you more circumspect in what you blog or otherwise write about? As a habit I don’t generally post anything online that I’d be embarrassed about if it was tied back to me, but I have become more cautious after witnessing the experiences of others who posted under their real name and incurred the wrath of some unbalanced internet troll.
Joe • Sep 6, 2012 @5:48 am

Another example of what can happen when posting an opinion onine. Oregon dentist suing patient for negative online review. http://www.komonews.com/news/local/168275996.html

Story is missing some facts such as second opinion of another dentist. I suspect it will be thrown out and the dentist is certainly going to learn about the Streisand Effect.
David Brant • Sep 6, 2012 @6:10 am

In appreciation for your ideas, spilled ever so effectively all over Popehat, I thank you. I am not entitled, but I do so enjoy your writings, even if I do not always agree with the sentiment.

Take your time, relax, try to see this blogging thing as the release that it should be, rather than an anchor holding you in the harbor.
TimS • Sep 6, 2012 @6:26 am

Ken,

I appreciate all your effort on this blog – and respect the trade-offs you need to make. I aspire some day to do as much good with my law-craft as you do here at Popehat.
Jeremy • Sep 6, 2012 @7:56 am

There isn't anything I wouldn't write about on the internet. However, I realized the value of anonymity on the internet long ago. I would never blog under a known identity on the internet, never.

Keep blogging Ken.
Shane • Sep 6, 2012 @8:08 am

Hmmm, In my life, blogging is pretty new, but my experience with "trolls" (I call them something else :) predates the electronic world. I can't tell you what to do, but I can say this … evil wins when good men (women) stay quiet.

I worked in an art bar in downtown Phoenix, I have always been kind of an … uhh … harsh person. I have always had a temper and injustice meter. When I see something that is unjustice, I can not rest until it is righted. I have learned that some things are beyond my higher powers desire for me to solve. That said, I have stood up to people far bigger than I. I have dealt with crowd situations that bordered on riot. All in the name of "justice". I helped the owner of that bar make a safe place for people to go to relax and not have to worry that some loser was going to poison the environment. By being "that guy" and getting the scum to focus on me (something I really don't have choice in anyway) I was making life better for everyone else that the loser didn't bother. I am equipped to handle this and I have made many friends because those people at first hating me and what I am, saw who I truly was and how I really did help life be better.

I see you being a lawyer a lot like the good bouncer, who's shear presence keeps the thugs and scum at bay, so the rest of us can enjoy our lives. Yes, the losers will focus on you, but remember when they are focusing on you they are not focusing on someone else that is in all likelihood less equipped or prepared to deal with them. Your blogging is a two fold good thing, it helps people see that justice can and will prevail and it provides a network for people to get help when the thugs and bullies come knocking at their door.

Your mandate (yes I said that) will protect you from being truly harmed by any of the losers, but just be warned and you probably already know this, if you step outside your mandate you lose your protection and you will be hurt.

I have been is some seriously scary situations enough that my wife has wondered if she wants to stay with someone like me, but I have always come out safe and the situations have always brought good. Just remember that though many of the people that you have helped with this blog cannot thank you, you are needed and appreciated.
Tam • Sep 6, 2012 @9:39 am

Anecdotal evidence suggests that having a profile pic in which you are holding a very politically incorrect looking rifle keeps the threats from whackadoodle trolls down to a dull roar. ;)
Road Dog • Sep 6, 2012 @10:03 am

Unitarian Universalists know not to write about UUism online. The religion itself has an abusive stalker.
Grandy • Sep 6, 2012 @10:38 am

If they're shooting at you, you must be doing something right.
Chris R. • Sep 6, 2012 @10:45 am

Now that I have my own crazies online, I tend to think about how personally identifying I want some of my information to be. As information they have on me changes, I tend not to update it online so that they don't have new information, or at least without any foot work on their part.
kmckee7 • Sep 6, 2012 @12:52 pm

Ken: I LOVE YOU, MAN. No, seriously: I love you, because your work and your blogging help make my native country (which I also love) a better place. I think there are a quite a few of us Popehat readers who feel that way.

Do what you need to do to take care of yourself and your family. But please come back to us and fight the good Internet fight when you have the time and emotional resources to do so. Never think that we don't appreciate your speaking truth to power on our behalf. We've got your back.
Joe • Sep 6, 2012 @1:15 pm

@Tam – not a bad idea – just changed my avatar. Probably not as scary as a real person holding a gun but then again have you ever seen an angry moose? I can attest from personal experience it is a sphincter clenching moment of the first degree if you happen to get in the way of one of these guys during mating season without a gun in your hands. They can run faster than 35 miles an hour for at least 10-15 minutes straight. I know this only because my buddy (who had indulged in a few too many beers) managed to deliberately antagonize one of them and we had to pile into in his truck while I drove as fast as I could through the underbrush and winding dirt back roads while this enraged bull moose tried to chase us down. I’m still not convinced the moose didn’t think either my friend or his truck was a rival for the attention of the local lady moose since I understand they have very poor eyesight – which considering how ugly moose are is probably a good thing.
Dan • Sep 6, 2012 @5:25 pm

My non-lawyer hobby is a lightly-trafficked BBQ & beer blog that chronicles my journey from utter incompetence to (hopefully, eventually) proficiency. I once entered an amateur BBQ rib competition, did a little research on how to tenderize ribs, parboiled the ribs, and won first place. I blogged about it – big damn mistake.

If you didn't know, and I didn't, parboiling ribs is to competitive BBQ what plagiarism is to the newspaper business.

Some hardcore BBQ message board somehow found my post, republished my pictures and some text, and then excoriated me. When you check your WordPress site stats and, instead of a couple dozen random search engine hits, you have hundreds of hits all referred from one message board… it's an odd feeling. Hardcore ridicule can be humbling, even when your blog is pseudo-anonymous.

That's a long-winded way of saying I don't blog about parboiling pork ribs anymore. Hardly controversial issues, but you did ask the question.
leo marvin • Sep 6, 2012 @9:05 pm

"nobody deserves my writings"

As part of "nobody," I object to this scurrilous, false assertion of my non-worth, and demand you remove it from your site. Also, if you don't return to blogging immediately, I want my money back.
azteclady • Sep 6, 2012 @10:24 pm

You have been sorely missed, and it's my hope you both feel like blogging again soon, and that work and other issues clear themselves so you can (have the energy and time for it).

I can't recall at the moment any online experience or interaction that had ever made me think twice about posting something, but I have witnessed some rather pointed examples of online harassment that has translated into real life threats. Because of these, I try to be careful about how much of my real life information I reveal online–though I know it's very difficult to be so absolutely cautious as to be truly anonymous.So I share little about my day to day life and my family.
flip • Sep 6, 2012 @11:32 pm

The very reason I post on blogs anonymously these days is because I was harassed (online and off) by someone I had criticised. I refuse to write about that topic anymore, partly because I don't want to be harassed, but mostly because the topic no longer interests me and I have other things to do. Everything else is pretty much up for discussion, although it depends on whether I'm writing under my pseudonym or my real name.
Joe • Sep 7, 2012 @5:14 am

As best as I can determine, this is the internet stalker troll & censorious douchebag 10 step action plan to success:

1.) My ego-testicals which are the source of my power will not be kept on the Mountain of Despair beyond the River of Fire guarded by the Dragons of Eternity. I will keep them in my safe-deposit box.

2.) I will consult with experts like Crystal Cox, Charles Carreon, Joseph Rakofsky, and Marc Stephens. They will be able to spot any flaws in my plan so that I can correct it prior to implementation.

3.) I will not waste time paying attention to the finer points of the law – I neither understand them nor care – after all, I’m not accountable to anyone.

4.) I will make it clear that while I know the meaning of the words “common sense”; I simply choose not to show any. Mostly because I am nuttier than a PayDay candy bar.

5.) If the facts don't support my position I will just make up new facts. Everyone will believe them because I will post them all over the internet and everyone knows if it is on the internet it must be true.

6.) When my enemy challenges me by countersuing, I’ll do everything in my power to avoid being served like the coward that I am. Similarly if I feel my case is going badly, I'll do everything I can to delay and draw it out as long as possible in hopes of exhausing my opponent.

7.) I will involve innocent bystanders like my enemies family members and friends by posting their private information, pictures, home address, employer, and other information on the internet in a pathetic attempt to intimidate my opponents.

8.) I will indulge the issuing of frivolous bar complaints, subpoenas, and letters requesting preservation of information to my enemies employers in an attempt to get my enemies fired. After all, if they don’t have a job they don’t have the money to sue me or defend themselves against my baseless lawsuits.

9.) I will not maintain a realistic assessment of weaknesses of my legal position because this takes too much of the fun out of the process and I want to remain oblivious to the fact I will eventually lose my case anyway. See #3 above.

10.) I will be neither chivalrous nor sporting. I will sue everyone who dares to injure my sensitive feelings or who makes me look like the idiot douchebag that I am.
BoxersOrCaseBriefs • Sep 7, 2012 @10:51 am

I've had my share of fun with nutjobs. I'm an editor for a nonprofit community resource website that is quite high-profile. After preventing a local business owner from deleting negative information from the page (it's done wiki-style where anyone can edit page content), I became a target.

My then-employer got phone calls seeking my personal information and business listings for my firm on a variety of websites began getting spammed with reviews calling me (by name) a child molester and a wide variety of other nasty stuff.

This went on for about two months, with this guy and at least one other person posting comments about me every 1-4 days. IP records showed that they went to incredible lengths to circumvent IP bans, posting from 20 or 30 different IP addresses in half a dozen cities, including residences, businesses, public libraries, and public wi-fi. I also got phone calls and letters. Not the most enjoyable process.

It all stopped abruptly when he was informed that I was filing a lawsuit (what a funny coincidence). It's been quiet ever since. My identity is still public on that website, but I keep some of my personal details a little more quiet – address, employment, etc. I've also reduced my involvement in the editing process, generally avoiding engaging problem contributors with detailed explanations and attempts at outreach.

It's just not worth the stress and headache of dealing with the crazies that pop up.
Shane • Sep 7, 2012 @11:36 am

Fodder,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2199643/Restaurateur-sets-fake-sex-site-profile-customer-posted-negative-review.html
laj • Sep 7, 2012 @5:06 pm

I've missed you, thanks for the post.
Namaste Ken and may the Force be with you.
smurfy • Sep 7, 2012 @5:08 pm

I went on a date with a lobbyist last night (I know, low standards), I told a story about match.com and she said, "I just can't bring myself to have that much personal information out there on the internet." I'll bet she's in a position to know exactly how said information could be used against someone. Worst I've ever had is bitter ex GFs trolling my profiles and calling up to say, "That's bullshit, you're not kind an considerate, and you don't make $200,000."
Wick • Sep 8, 2012 @6:07 am

While the litigation was pending, I blogged about a series of defamation lawsuits in the world of Chess politics that started with usenet sock puppetry and then spun bizarrely out of control. I began the blog so that I could educate noncombatants on some of the issues in the case. There was a comic opera tone to the whole litigation that I enjoyed exploiting, but it was disconcerting that the parties to the litigation and the lawyers were following my blog.
Jess • Sep 9, 2012 @2:09 pm

Just posted Sept. 7 on Crystal Cox’s blog.

“Ms. Cox is in fear for her life because of Randazza's ties with the Mafia. Additionally, he has sent out a ring of bloggers and stalkers to harass Ms. Cox constantly. Most notably, someone connected to Randazza threatened to break Ms. Cox's legs in a conspiracy with the well-known criminal, Kenneth White, who is a blatant apologist for Randazza."

Facepalm.

See #5 above on Joe's list of the "internet stalker troll & censorious douchebag 10 step action plan to success"
Andrew Roth • Sep 11, 2012 @4:11 pm

So far, I've been lucky enough to avoid any real trouble online. I've been flamed on occasion, but usually on self-policing sites where the peanut gallery gangs up on the resident nuisances.

My own blog exists in an awkward state of semianonymity. It's my own fault that I didn't keep it more fully anonymous. Still, I try to be circumspect about how and where I discuss it, and I'm careful to use pseudonyms and change details that I fear might directly identify the subjects of my writing. My feeling is that it's not my fault if some sleuth noses around the Internet and outs my subjects, since I make it clear on both WordPress and Twitter that I desire circumspection.

That said, I have felt a slight but distinct chilling effect on my online speech in a few areas. For one thing, I recently discovered that my parents now follow my blog. This is a bit embarrassing on account of my practice of oversharing, and I feel that I'm in a minor ethical bind because my overshares are as relevant to my essays as anything else I write. I would never tolerate a busybody admonishing me not to share coarse details from my personal life in that fashion.

That's one of the reasons that I have no interest in starting a family-oriented blog. I find it repulsive to even think about catering to the sensibilities of easily butthurt relatives. Frankly, I find most family blogging craven and dishonest, and I don't want to go there. Inviting relatives to hang around my blog would also invite them to introduce insipid family drama into my online life, something that I absolutely do not want.

On the positive side, only one of my relatives has befriended me on Facebook, and my parents are out of the loop because my dad is uncomfortable being my Facebook friend. I agree with him. It's a setup for boundary incursions by inappropriate relatives.

Facebook is the closest thing that I have to a litmus test for how my writing is received. The results are mostly positive or neutral, but I have raised some hackles. One jerk flagged a Facebook status update in which I criticized our Alma Mater for its crass fundraising efforts. (I'm pretty sure that the culprit was a law student at the time.) I suspect that I've alienated others by poking fun at the Kony 2012 derp and arguing that Kony is not singularly evil. I fear that I may have alienated some people by speaking kindly of prostitution and ill of Nicholas Kristof. It makes me feel like a moral coward, but I'm sometimes hesitant to be candid about frauds like Kristof and the Stop Kony movement because I have a sinking feeling that I may damage friendships by doing so. My adversaries in these debates just seem to have too much passion and too little reason.

This is an even bigger problem for debates about abortion and natural family planning. I've seen both issues turn otherwise very reasonable and thoughtful people into Manichean zealots who promote the ravings of useful idiots. What really scares me is that some of the people caught up in this foolishness are close friends. I worry that our friendship may disintegrate because they're steeped in such acrimony.
Derrick Coetzee • Sep 14, 2012 @10:32 am

I once operated under a pseudonym but now conduct 90% of online activity under my real name (along with some personal details like city and age), despite having no shortage of trolls after my head. This is partly because the use of my real name enables me to defuse harassing attempts to "out" me from the get-go. It's partly because I'd like to link my professional research career in a more direct way to my online volunteer activities. I still exercise common sense in keeping details like street address and phone number private so that stalkers don't show up at my doorstep. And of course I bear no ill will towards those who choose to operate under a completely anonymous identity, and would never seek to expose them – I enjoy the privilege of a white male in a progressive and tolerant city, others do not.

However there are times when I do retreat into a pseudonym – largely when I want to discuss deeply private or highly controversial feelings, or explore identity and people's reactions to me while avoiding preconceptions. I have no doubt that some of the trolls who monitor me would have a field day with such personal information. Constructing such anonymous identities without at any point linking them to my primary one can prove very challenging, but I think it's worthwhile as a way to engage with the world at a deeper level.