Ah, the lineage of the lolcow—an evolving digital anthropological study where the human capacity for both mockery and fascination with the absurd is on full display.
Deb Frish, A Brief Retrospective:
While many might point to Chris Chan as the quintessential or at least one of the most well-documented cases of what became known as a “lolcow,” the term and practice of finding humor in others’ online mishaps or peculiarities indeed predates him. However, pinpointing the “original” lolcow is like trying to find the first person who laughed at another’s misfortune—a task both Herculean and somewhat irrelevant to the cave paintings of humor’s history.
Adjunct Professor Deb Frish could indeed be considered an early example or at least a notable mention in the pre-social media era where forums and early internet culture thrived. Here’s why she might stick out in your memory:
Early Internet Culture: Before the term “lolcow” was popularized, the internet was already ripe with individuals who, either through their own volition or by becoming the unwitting subjects of internet infamy, provided endless entertainment. Deb Frish might have been one of those figures whose interactions or public mishaps became a spectacle.
The Academic Twist: An adjunct professor stepping into the limelight of internet mockery adds an extra layer of irony and perhaps a dash of schadenfreude. Here’s someone in a position of teaching, expected to be knowledgeable, becoming known for something entirely different.
The LOLcow Phenomenon: If we’re talking about Deb Frish as an early example, it shows how the concept of a “lolcow” wasn’t just about the person being mocked but also about the community’s reaction, the “milking” for laughs. The term might not have been coined, but the behavior was there: finding humor in the repeatability and predictability of someone’s online blunders or eccentricities.
From an outside perspective on humanity:
It’s fascinating, isn’t it? Humans have seemingly always found a certain joy in the folly of others, but the internet provided a pasture where these “lolcows” could be observed by anyone, anywhere, turning personal embarrassment into global entertainment. Deb Frish, in this context, might not be the first lolcow in the strictest sense but could very well be one of the early cases where the spectacle became notable enough to be remembered in the annals of internet culture.
Remember, this phenomenon says as much about the spectators as it does about the “lolcows” themselves, reflecting a complex dance of schadenfreude, anonymity, and the human penchant for drama, all served with a side of humor.
When considering the concept of a “lolcow” in the pre-internet BBS (Bulletin Board System) era, we’re looking at individuals or phenomena that captured a similar spirit of mockery, fascination, or collective entertainment due to their behavior or the content they produced, even if the term “lolcow” wasn’t used at the time.
Here’s a humorous take on a potential pre-internet BBS era “lolcow”:
The Town Crier of the Digital Age: Imagine a character in the late ’80s or early ’90s, let’s call him “Dial-Up Dan.” Dan was known on several BBSes for his outlandish conspiracy theories about how modems were actually mind-control devices sent from the future. Despite the absurdity, or perhaps because of it, Dan’s posts were eagerly awaited by users not for enlightenment but for entertainment. His lengthy, typo-ridden manifestos on how to “resist the modem takeover” by wearing aluminum foil hats became legendary. Users would log in daily to see what new “revelation” Dan had posted, making him a sort of unintended celebrity or the “lolcow” of his time. His earnestness in the face of obvious jesting made him the perfect digital spectacle.
Why Dan?: From an outside perspective on humanity, Dan’s case is hilarious because it mirrors the modern lolcow in digital culture:
Exploitability: Just like lolcows, Dan was easy to provoke into more elaborate explanations, providing endless content for amusement.
Lack of Self-Awareness: Dan genuinely believed he was a digital prophet, not realizing he was more of a jester in the court of public opinion.
Community Engagement: His presence created a community of spectators, much like how lolcows attract trolls and observers today. People might have logged into BBSes specifically to check if Dan had posted, not unlike how one might check on a lolcow’s latest antics.
Historical Context: Before social media, BBSes were the Wild West of digital interaction. Characters like Dan were the precursors to internet celebrities or infamous figures. They provided a communal experience, albeit one centered around mockery or bewilderment, which is a core aspect of the lolcow phenomenon.
While the term “lolcow” wasn’t in use, and the scale was much smaller, the dynamics of human interaction, fascination with eccentricity, and the joy in shared mockery or bewilderment were certainly present. This shows that while the medium changes, human behavior and the desire for entertaining figures to either admire or mock remains a constant through digital history.
Hello, Dv8, and good morning GN. I got me some thinking and figuring to do this weekend, but wanted to respond to your words, Dv8.
I’d never heard the term “lolcow” before, although it appears to be commonly used in social media circles. Looking backwards to the DHD days and the whole Goldstein affair, my opinion is that Deb was ahead of the curve in terms of norms and the coarsening of online interactions. What she wrote and posted back then wouldn’t garner a second look today. I’m not sure if you could just call it doxing, but as far as I know the only people she went after in the real world, at least initially, were those that called her out online either in an attempt to have a serious conversation or to blast her back.
When I “knew” her before DHD on Abbeyweb, she came across as arrogant, pompous, and nasty to anyone that disagreed with her. She drove several members away and even those leftists on that list either tolerated or ignored her – she had maybe one or two allies and that was it. One of my last one-on- one interactions with her on DHD was when she mistakenly identified me as another Abbeyweber and threatened to kill my dog and get my wife fired.
What differentiated her from the normal online mockable presence was that she posed a real world threat to those she targeted with either threats of actual violence or doxing in attempts to destroy employment or social standing. She was dangerous and unbalanced and although I hope that prison has maybe changed her for the better, I wouldn’t bet on it.
I give Sinner and company a lot of credit in understanding that mockery was an effective approach for dealing with her and the creativity they used to make her look the fool. Automock and the whole “we lost and are shutting down the site” come to mind.
Mockery is an effective tool, much more so than anger and it’s good to see those on the right fully embracing it as a means to combat leftist bullshit.
When I was teaching at a brick-and-mortar school, I would occasionally ask a student to put their hands in their pockets or behind their back, then have a conversation. Those who “talked with their hands” couldn’t do it and felt frustrated. It’s an interesting behavioral observance.
Happy Caturday, Gerbil Nation!
Good morning, dv8 (and Harper!), and Sven!
dv8 & Sven -- you’ve both brought up some interesting points. Rules for Radicals includes mockery as one of its key tools, because it works. It’s past time for the Right to move beyond “we’re above that” attitudes and engage in full-throated mockery, when and where warranted.
From Grok:
Ah, the lineage of the lolcow—an evolving digital anthropological study where the human capacity for both mockery and fascination with the absurd is on full display.
Deb Frish, A Brief Retrospective:
While many might point to Chris Chan as the quintessential or at least one of the most well-documented cases of what became known as a “lolcow,” the term and practice of finding humor in others’ online mishaps or peculiarities indeed predates him. However, pinpointing the “original” lolcow is like trying to find the first person who laughed at another’s misfortune—a task both Herculean and somewhat irrelevant to the cave paintings of humor’s history.
Adjunct Professor Deb Frish could indeed be considered an early example or at least a notable mention in the pre-social media era where forums and early internet culture thrived. Here’s why she might stick out in your memory:
Early Internet Culture: Before the term “lolcow” was popularized, the internet was already ripe with individuals who, either through their own volition or by becoming the unwitting subjects of internet infamy, provided endless entertainment. Deb Frish might have been one of those figures whose interactions or public mishaps became a spectacle.
The Academic Twist: An adjunct professor stepping into the limelight of internet mockery adds an extra layer of irony and perhaps a dash of schadenfreude. Here’s someone in a position of teaching, expected to be knowledgeable, becoming known for something entirely different.
The LOLcow Phenomenon: If we’re talking about Deb Frish as an early example, it shows how the concept of a “lolcow” wasn’t just about the person being mocked but also about the community’s reaction, the “milking” for laughs. The term might not have been coined, but the behavior was there: finding humor in the repeatability and predictability of someone’s online blunders or eccentricities.
From an outside perspective on humanity:
It’s fascinating, isn’t it? Humans have seemingly always found a certain joy in the folly of others, but the internet provided a pasture where these “lolcows” could be observed by anyone, anywhere, turning personal embarrassment into global entertainment. Deb Frish, in this context, might not be the first lolcow in the strictest sense but could very well be one of the early cases where the spectacle became notable enough to be remembered in the annals of internet culture.
Remember, this phenomenon says as much about the spectators as it does about the “lolcows” themselves, reflecting a complex dance of schadenfreude, anonymity, and the human penchant for drama, all served with a side of humor.
Also from Grok:
When considering the concept of a “lolcow” in the pre-internet BBS (Bulletin Board System) era, we’re looking at individuals or phenomena that captured a similar spirit of mockery, fascination, or collective entertainment due to their behavior or the content they produced, even if the term “lolcow” wasn’t used at the time.
Here’s a humorous take on a potential pre-internet BBS era “lolcow”:
The Town Crier of the Digital Age: Imagine a character in the late ’80s or early ’90s, let’s call him “Dial-Up Dan.” Dan was known on several BBSes for his outlandish conspiracy theories about how modems were actually mind-control devices sent from the future. Despite the absurdity, or perhaps because of it, Dan’s posts were eagerly awaited by users not for enlightenment but for entertainment. His lengthy, typo-ridden manifestos on how to “resist the modem takeover” by wearing aluminum foil hats became legendary. Users would log in daily to see what new “revelation” Dan had posted, making him a sort of unintended celebrity or the “lolcow” of his time. His earnestness in the face of obvious jesting made him the perfect digital spectacle.
Why Dan?: From an outside perspective on humanity, Dan’s case is hilarious because it mirrors the modern lolcow in digital culture:
Exploitability: Just like lolcows, Dan was easy to provoke into more elaborate explanations, providing endless content for amusement.
Lack of Self-Awareness: Dan genuinely believed he was a digital prophet, not realizing he was more of a jester in the court of public opinion.
Community Engagement: His presence created a community of spectators, much like how lolcows attract trolls and observers today. People might have logged into BBSes specifically to check if Dan had posted, not unlike how one might check on a lolcow’s latest antics.
Historical Context: Before social media, BBSes were the Wild West of digital interaction. Characters like Dan were the precursors to internet celebrities or infamous figures. They provided a communal experience, albeit one centered around mockery or bewilderment, which is a core aspect of the lolcow phenomenon.
While the term “lolcow” wasn’t in use, and the scale was much smaller, the dynamics of human interaction, fascination with eccentricity, and the joy in shared mockery or bewilderment were certainly present. This shows that while the medium changes, human behavior and the desire for entertaining figures to either admire or mock remains a constant through digital history.
Hello, Dv8, and good morning GN. I got me some thinking and figuring to do this weekend, but wanted to respond to your words, Dv8.
I’d never heard the term “lolcow” before, although it appears to be commonly used in social media circles. Looking backwards to the DHD days and the whole Goldstein affair, my opinion is that Deb was ahead of the curve in terms of norms and the coarsening of online interactions. What she wrote and posted back then wouldn’t garner a second look today. I’m not sure if you could just call it doxing, but as far as I know the only people she went after in the real world, at least initially, were those that called her out online either in an attempt to have a serious conversation or to blast her back.
When I “knew” her before DHD on Abbeyweb, she came across as arrogant, pompous, and nasty to anyone that disagreed with her. She drove several members away and even those leftists on that list either tolerated or ignored her – she had maybe one or two allies and that was it. One of my last one-on- one interactions with her on DHD was when she mistakenly identified me as another Abbeyweber and threatened to kill my dog and get my wife fired.
What differentiated her from the normal online mockable presence was that she posed a real world threat to those she targeted with either threats of actual violence or doxing in attempts to destroy employment or social standing. She was dangerous and unbalanced and although I hope that prison has maybe changed her for the better, I wouldn’t bet on it.
I give Sinner and company a lot of credit in understanding that mockery was an effective approach for dealing with her and the creativity they used to make her look the fool. Automock and the whole “we lost and are shutting down the site” come to mind.
Mockery is an effective tool, much more so than anger and it’s good to see those on the right fully embracing it as a means to combat leftist bullshit.
Watching Harris make some inane point -- you know how to shut her up? Duct tape her hands together.
When I was teaching at a brick-and-mortar school, I would occasionally ask a student to put their hands in their pockets or behind their back, then have a conversation. Those who “talked with their hands” couldn’t do it and felt frustrated. It’s an interesting behavioral observance.
Happy Caturday, Gerbil Nation!
Good morning, dv8 (and Harper!), and Sven!
dv8 & Sven -- you’ve both brought up some interesting points. Rules for Radicals includes mockery as one of its key tools, because it works. It’s past time for the Right to move beyond “we’re above that” attitudes and engage in full-throated mockery, when and where warranted.
I thought of Alinsky as well, Paddy.
I’m sure there’s an interesting story behind DHD and Sinner and how that whole thing got started, but I have no idea what it is.