Posted by: mark | http://cyberfuddle.com/infinitebabble/ | Sat Jan 18 17:55:33 2003

It's amazing that he doesn't even bother mounting any arguments to refute le Carre, despite using the piont-by-point thing.

When it was invented (on USENET, I believe), it was a handy way to deal with each point on its own, in a way that meant everyone knew what you were talking about, you had no need to waste space introducing the point you wished to refute, and there was little room for arguments that you were misrepresenting the original poster's arguments (unless, of course, you edited his post a little more than judiciously).

"Fisking" has taken over real argument, at least for the warbloggers. If you can make a (usually, but admittedly not always, unfunny) joke about each line of text -- even if it's got nothing to do with what you're replying to -- you can claim to have refuted the OP.

But it's not for this sort of crap that I loathe Misha. It's more for honestly believing that calling Britain a Stalinist state is called for; or for fantasising about raping the Malaysian Trade Minister (who

Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org | Sun Jan 19 13:56:26 2003

I don't hate him; I find him amusing, and sincerely hope that nobody ever lets him anywhere near the launch controls of a nuclear weapon.

Mind you, Misha has a few sensible points (like about the guy in England jailed for shooting a burglar in self-defence); though I suspect it's more the case of a stopped clock being right twice a day.

Posted by: Ritchie | http:// | Sun Jan 19 14:00:16 2003

Until you posted this link, I'd never seen a warblog. It was kind of interesting. Misha seemed to be indulging in a kind of fantasy of omnipotence, mastery and control. I kept trying to read between the lines for some evidence of irony (beyond the gimmick of pretending to be royalty), but there wasn't any. Apparently he believes what he's saying.

I guess my main objection to fisking is that it comes across as being rather crude and heavy-handed. No doubt it's a satisfying exercise to engage in, but it makes for dull reading, even when you agree with the rebuttal.

Posted by: Graham | http://grudnuk.com | Sun Jan 19 14:35:52 2003

It's just alt.flame of yore, except the flamers didn't take themselves seriously. (Well, not all of them, anyway.)

Posted by: acb | http://dev.null.org | Sun Jan 19 14:42:35 2003

What do you suppose the odds are that he's really a severely socially-inept teenager living out his macho-man alpha-male fantasies on the Interwebnet?

Posted by: Ritchie | http:// | Sun Jan 19 20:01:39 2003

Probably an adult. Probably single. Probably not that many friends. Probably employed, in what is probably generally regarded as a dull or unimportant job. I imagine he's rather lonely, and that in his heart he perceives himself as being powerless. There are thousands like him. Bit sad, really.

Posted by: Ben | http://leviathan.weblogs.com | Mon Jan 20 02:27:19 2003

Speaking of which, my ex-housemate Rick has apparently finally been banned from working at every hospital and nursing home in the state (except some place in Coburg) and is now pursuing a career in telemarketing.