Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 9 minutes later, 57 minutes after the original post[^][v]#1,234,943
@previous (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
Because you spank smooth, shiny bottoms and draw toddlers being abused by authority figures and forced to change gender against their will.
> Yeah, they're very similar. Practically the same posting style. > > I really wonder if the people who say this remember what TG was like. He was a nutcase, my dudes.
TG’s posts were a mix of weird l33t speak ED article prose
As amusing as it is to me to bait you pedophiles into posting stuff like this, would you kindly confine it to Tinychan where it is the character's raison d'être? Much obliged.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^][v]#1,234,970
@previous (G)
Not the early net for Matt. Early net for Matt is mid-90s drama, like Syntax and others from the Bianca days. The anontalk era was a full decade after that.
tteh !MemesToDNA replied with this 2 years ago, 50 seconds later, 3 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,234,997
@1,234,993 (I)
Dave is the reason that, when you take a nap in trousers, you wake up with pantaloons. Dave tangles your earphones' cable when you leave them in a drawer. Dave hides every other sock you own. David is the chap who broke Imgur uploads. Dave is the reason your marriage is moribund. Dave is every single poster on the board. Dave was suspiciously absent during the September 11 attacks. Dave has never commented on cancer (possibly pro-cancer).
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 20 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,235,038
@1,235,001 (K) > Everyone makes the pedo claims and there's never any evidence
There was plenty of evidence on TGcomix's deviantart account before it got shut down. He also went by the handle Gaius Marius (or something like that) who was known to have written pedo erotica. TGcomix was a truly vile, disgusting individual. I hope the reason you don't see him around any more is because he's in jail.
I don't think this Dave from Russia character is TG. He just likes to make people think he is for some bizarre reason.
tteh !MemesToDNA replied with this 2 years ago, 13 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,235,043
@previous (H)
I mean, it can elicit hundreds of replies. And brings out the nastiest and most deranged anons. There have been threads where Dave contributes once, perhaps, early on, and then 50 random people all bicker with each other and accuse each other of being 'Dave' and it goes on and on. Call it low intelligence if you'd like but it's some of the most effortless trolling I've seen, and that makes me chuckle.
Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,235,045
Dave is all of those, and he is ALSO the guy who prances about Bangkok in a Victorian opera cape, gayly and merrily flitting from underage ladyboy bar to underage ladyboy bar.
Anonymous H replied with this 2 years ago, 2 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,235,111
@1,235,043 (tteh !MemesToDNA) > I mean, it can elicit hundreds of replies.
Okay, I'll give him that. Not a high bar, though.
> And brings out the nastiest and most deranged anons. There have been threads where Dave contributes once, perhaps, early on, and then 50 random people all bicker with each other and accuse each other of being 'Dave' and it goes on and on. Call it low intelligence if you'd like but it's some of the most effortless trolling I've seen, and that makes me chuckle.
Speaking purely from my own professional opinion, I don't include "effort" in my assessment of a troll's merit. Do you care how many days or weeks it took to write a novel or to paint the Mona Lisa? I don't. I judge the value of any work of art by the end product, not by the effort or the time that went into it.
Further, I only count trolling and enraging anon's as one tenth the value of enraging named posters.
The best trolling is subtle. It should leave anyone with reasonable intelligence (under the legal, common-law definition) unsure of the author's true intentions. Dave fails spectacularly in that regard.
Think of the Anontalk trolling days. All the trolls that got through Kimmo and the wiseguys, but just barely, that was peak trolling. Same for all the posts that just barely didn't. All the trolly example posts he complained about in the bulletins that anyone without hours and hours of context would think just seem like a simple innocent grammatical errors. That's peak trolling.
Trolling doesn't need to have an element of social satire -- although the best trolling tends to have that too. But it does, at least, need to be subtle. Otherwise it's just retarded. Which can be funny too, but it's not trolling under the proper legal definition of the term.
> >I mean, it can elicit hundreds of replies. > Okay, I'll give him that. Not a high bar, though. > > >And brings out the nastiest and most deranged anons. There have been threads where Dave contributes once, perhaps, early on, and then 50 random people all bicker with each other and accuse each other of being 'Dave' and it goes on and on. Call it low intelligence if you'd like but it's some of the most effortless trolling I've seen, and that makes me chuckle. > > Speaking purely from my own professional opinion, I don't include "effort" in my assessment of a troll's merit. Do you care how many days or weeks it took to write a novel or to paint the Mona Lisa? I don't. I judge the value of any work of art by the end product, not by the effort or the time that went into it. > > Further, I only count trolling and enraging anon's as one tenth the value of enraging named posters. > > The best trolling is subtle. It should leave anyone with reasonable intelligence (under the legal, common-law definition) unsure of the author's true intentions. Dave fails spectacularly in that regard. > > Think of the Anontalk trolling days. All the trolls that got through Kimmo and the wiseguys, but just barely, that was peak trolling. Same for all the posts that just barely didn't. All the trolly example posts he complained about in the bulletins that anyone without hours and hours of context would think just seem like a simple innocent grammatical errors. That's peak trolling. > > Trolling doesn't need to have an element of social satire -- although the best trolling tends to have that too. But it does, at least, need to be subtle. Otherwise it's just retarded. Which can be funny too, but it's not trolling under the proper legal definition of the term.
Intelligent people cannot be trolled by irrelevant characters on obscure internet forums. That is by definition what makes them intelligent. You are wildly over-thinking this my child.
Anonymous M replied with this 2 years ago, 45 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,235,265
@previous (Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U)
Disagree. Intelligent people can be trolled by irrelevant characters on obscure internet fora. You are a good example. You seem fairly intelligent, and yet you are being trolled right now.