Not everyone approved of my decision to post that email. It hadn’t enough gravitas or whatever; I was adjudged less than wise to dabble in trivia. As one commenter said:
if you really dont mind 2c of advice from your long-time reader: you are wasting time on this…
No doubt he was right. But these days, since I can’t wave away the fibro fatigue or our straitened circumstances, time is one thing I am permitted to waste in abundance. So I do.
Which brings me to the Hater Mail of the Week. Time was we got one of these annually, but the pace is picking up. The thing is, you can’t tell exactly what his objection is, given the wide bore of his flame-thrower.
Below the fold you’ll find our interlocutor’s “wow”. At least that was in the subject line. As an editor, I would critique his opening salvo. Better yet (even though I often suggest that writers aim for brevity) would have been: “Wow. Just wow”… Yes, ellipsis and all. Then the
Before moving on to his eloquent appraisal, which you will want to attend to carefully, here are the Baron’s rules regarding emails sent to Gates of Vienna:
A reminder to readers: our not publishing your email address long with the contents of your message is a privilege, not a right. We can and may decide to publish unsolicited emails or the addresses of the senders at any time, without warning.
Our general policy is never to publish any portion of any friendly email without the permission of the sender.
When someone sends us an unpleasant or insulting message, we may sometimes choose to post the text without identifying the sender.
When we get really vile hate mail, we may well publish it and include the sender’s name and address. If we’re feeling really, really cranky, we may even include message headers, the IP address, and anything else that might help a technogeek track down the sender.
This remains our prerogative. If we seem to be showing restraint, it’s because we’re basically nice guys. But even nice guys get ticked off occasionally.
Now I doubt that ol’ Robert Frescas has jumped into the fray without being deeply disguised. When the header says localhost (localhost.loopback… you have to figure this craven ankle-biter is not going to make himself available for your considered response to his call-out. But maybe I’m wrong. Maybe this email address is valid enough to receive your answers.
Here’s his email, succinct, fresh (just like his name!), and wittily original. If you have any trouble with the big words, just let us know. Needless to say, there were no asterisks in the original:
From: Robert Frescas firstname.lastname@example.org To: email@example.com Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 14:30:54 –0500 Subject: wow
You people are totally brain dead…go f*** yourselves
Ah, Robert, you divil, you. That message gave the Baron just the excuse he needed. He is determined to follow your sage advice, despite my protestations that I’m “busy”. Now I’m claiming a headache…but as my husband just pointed out, since I’m “totally brain dead” that rationale won’t fly either. Let’s see, where did I leave that golf club?
The Baron is curious about what might have finally pulled the pin on Robert. So much of what we post is offensive; it’s hard to choose. Was he responding to the Baron’s WAYCIST post from last night? Or was it Fjordman’s WAYCIST post from earlier today? Who knows…it could have been something from 2005 which moved him to open his email and start blasting away.
At least Mr. Frescas was observant enough to use the plural “you people” which means he noticed there is more than one person posting here. That’s more attention than some people give.
I googled his name, but the only likely suspect was an obituary notice in California. Ah well.
If you’re moved to create a dialogue with this person, have at it, with our compliments. He may turn out to be a worthy interlocutor, though first appearances don’t bode well for that. And who knows, that email may be genuine.