Mail Site Profiles (Best & Worst)

Timbo · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:16 pm

I'm starting to like the new Mail profiles system, where you can look back at a poster's previous works.

I just found one which is the perfect example of the Mailite psyche:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/registration ... ofile.html

Every post is nasty, sneering and negative. He spends his whole time on the internet desperately trying to make the rest of the world feel as crap as he does about his life.

Anyway, I started this thread so we can share the best and worst profiles.

ezinra · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:46 pm

Arkley Barnet is my idea of the archetypical Mail reader: he writes rambling, minimally-punctuated, what's-your-point drivel, as if filling in the time before Nurse arrives. Where possible he will use a longer or more arcane word (correct instead of right; recall instead of remember) in a bid to come across as authoritative and educated, and he expresses his very many prejudices with a sort of resigned superciliousness which is supposed to sound worldly-wise. I bet he reads The Oldie. An example:

Quote:

I like Badgers, I hate Milk, I eat beef although Cows look OK in a Cow way but who is correct in this argument, The Badger Cullers or The Cow Inoculators. We need more unbiased information from a wide range of experts. Clara what¿s her name the Cook wants us to eat badgers but I suspect that will upset even more people as we like our storybook animals. If Farm animals were part of our storyhood we might be more vegetarian by now but I don't recall any stories with cows apart from that one that got so high she jumped over the moon, what has the RSPCA got to say about that although it did amuse some little dog. Rating 2

Malcolm Armsteen · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 4:52 pm

I love the word 'storyhood' - that's brilliant. I'll use that one.

Fozzy · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 7:43 pm

John/Roger/Salfordian of Brighton/England/Salford: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/registration ... riod=month

BBC - BBC PR person - BBC employs people to red-arrow this site - down with immigration - BBC - down with lefty judges - BBC - BBC - benefit claimants - zzzzzzzzz

oboogie · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:11 pm

How do you know that's John/Roger?

Fozzy · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 10:18 pm

Mainly because of that tell-tale obsession with the BBC combined with the constantly-repeated tedious accusation that everyone who says anything in their defence is a "BBC person" or "BBC PR person". Plus he's manifested himself as John of Salford, and as John of England told us all that he lived in Salford., John of England popped up when Roger of England disappeared, etc etc.

oboogie · **Posted:** Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:17 pm

By Jove, Holmes.... I think you've got it!

Daley Mayle · **Posted:** Sat Sep 29, 2012 10:52 am

I bet Fozzy could work out the clues on 3-2-1.

ezinra · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2012 3:25 pm

You'd expect someone calling himself TonyMartin to be a cunt, and indeed this one is, although he gets his kicks not from shooting people (as far as we know) but from insulting celebrity women. Here's how he feels about some of the Mail's regulars:

Lauren Goodger: "Brainless, untalented and seriously overweight oompah loompah with a mouth like a carp"
Kim Kardashian: "talentless chubby deformed midget with an over inflated opinion of herself."
Tulisa: "Pig."
Jesy Nelson from Little mix: "Miss Piggy - rolled in Doritos."
Imogen Thomas: "welly top much?"
TOWIE's Chloe Sims: "She's horrendously cross eyed..."
Samantha Brick and Shona Sibary: "These two women are not only dull, boring and ugly, but also self promoting, narcissistic and completely deluded. Go back to your kitchens."

I want to emphasise that the Mail is not just providing a platform for, but actively encouraging misogynists like Tony to spread his hatred for these and other women, in a space where he'll be widely heard yet can remain anonymous. Tony is the rock on which Mail Online is making its profits.

Malcolm Armsteen · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2012 6:59 pm

Could this little post which I found by accident shed light on the Mailite mentality?

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/unequallyy ... -like.html

A subject has his amygdala suppressed. It mirrors the feelings of a psychopath:

Quote:

It isn’t long before I start to notice a fuzzier, more pervasive, more existential difference. Before the experiment, I’d been curious about the time scale: how long it would take me to begin to feel the rush. Now I had the answer: about 10 to 15 minutes. The same amount of time, I guess, that it would take most people to get a buzz out of a beer or a glass of wine.

The effects aren’t entirely dissimilar. An easy, airy confidence. A transcendental loosening of inhibition. The inchoate stirrings of a subjective moral swagger: the encroaching, and somehow strangely spiritual, realization that hell, who gives a s—, anyway?

There is, however, one notable exception. One glaring, unmistakable difference between this and the effects of alcohol. That’s the lack of attendant sluggishness. The enhancement of attentional acuity and sharpness. An insuperable feeling of heightened, polished awareness. Sure, my conscience certainly feels like it’s on ice, and my anxieties drowned with a half-dozen shots of transcranial magnetic Jack Daniel’s. But, at the same time, my whole way of being feels as if it’s been sumptuously spring-cleaned with light. My soul, or whatever you want to call it, immersed in a spiritual dishwasher.

So this, I think to myself, is how it feels to be a psychopath. To cruise through life knowing that no matter what you say or do, guilt, remorse, shame, pity, fear—all those familiar, everyday warning signals that might normally light up on your psychological dashboard—no longer trouble you.

I suddenly get a flash of insight. We talk about gender. We talk about class. We talk about color. And intelligence. And creed. But the most fundamental difference between one individual and another must surely be that of the presence, or absence, of conscience. Conscience is what hurts when everything else feels good. But what if it’s as tough as old boots? What if one’s conscience has an infinite, unlimited pain threshold and doesn’t bat an eye when others are screaming in agony?

Thoughts?

Paul · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:21 pm

see also

viewtopic.php?f=11&t=5288

Paul · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:04 pm

I think Anne is cringing at this, although she may have found a way into the D M back door to improve the scores.

ezinra · **Posted:** Mon Oct 29, 2012 11:23 pm

Malcolm Armsteen wrote:

Thoughts?

It's a very interesting and well-observed piece; I've never seen the effects of suppressed amygdala explained descriptively before.

To avoid any suggestion of biological determinism, it's maybe worth restating that a person's behaviour can have an effect on the shape of their brain as well as vice versa. Suppressed amygdalae are also supposed to correlate with homosexuality, so naturally I'm minded to resist the link with a Mailite mentality!

The beginning of the final paragraph bothers me because like is not compared with like: gender, colour and class are socially structured identities; if conscience can be measured, it will be as a psychological phenomenon. But his subsequent analysis of consciencelessness (yuk word!) is very powerful.

The Mail readers I know do not fit the pattern described here; they simply learn to override their conscience when they deem it necessary or prudent to do so. Then again, they are catholics! With people like TonyMartin of Berwick, discussed above, I can see where you're coming from. Personally I think the key facilitator is opportunity — he acts the cunt because there's no-one to stop him. For some people who have never done the difficult thinking needed to acquire their own, empirically-founded moral compass, all that prevents them from acting the cunt is fear of authority and damage to their reputation. There is no risk of either in anonymously posting boorish insults about widely-ridiculed women in the Mail. From a cultural rather than biological perspective, I'm tempted to look for parallels in pub banter or in sports fandom, where the group situation produces an escalated intensity of language which is, I think, superficial. This colourful cursing of referees, ugly women and other group-approved bogeypeople is a game, where the inventiveness of an insult is substantially more important than the intensity of feeling behind it. Yet these performances are designed — semi-consciously — to hint at a far darker and more violent rage than a man dare show in public among his mates; and at the absence of more authentic opportunities for expressing it than an illegible rant at a dubiously awarded penalty kick or the inaccessibility of a z-list celebrity woman.

Fozzy · **Posted:** Tue Oct 30, 2012 10:42 am

Paul wrote:

I think Anne is cringing at this, although she may have found a way into the D M back door to improve the scores.

Any chance of Anne telling us how?

ezinra · **Posted:** Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:50 pm

I'm sure I've been stuck next to a man, australia at a painfully long wedding reception:

Quote:

Can men and women REALLY ever be 'just friends'? MailOnline's sexpert Tracey Cox answers that eternal dilemma...

As a male, if you even hint the slightest at being attracted to someone, you are opening yourself up to a Sexual Harassment Lawsuit. Don't even think about it; your career would be over and - in today's economy - you will be essentially unemployable. No company would be willing to hire you especially if the case attracted any publicity. Rating 29

Quote:

Woman 'fed up' with messy boyfriend stamped him to death after he came home drunk and spilled beer on the carpet

Wimmin are out of control, those false rape accusations, murders of kids and murder of partners we always read about. It's terrible. --------- Unfortunately, it's the way the Feminists encourage. Of course, Heaven help anyone who points this out! Rating 11

Quote:

Forget about labour... Men CAN endure more pain than women, new study suggests

Woah, the Feminists will SHRED anyone who even hints at this sort of thing, in spite of it being the truth. Rating 36

Quote:

Why jogging a week before your period could damage your knees

Will someone tell the Feminists this so they can stop their mad push for females in the military? Rating 23

Quote:

Men ARE better at multitasking than women, Swedish researchers claim

The Feminists will be LIVID over this research, because it will deprive them of one more stick with which to bash men with. Rating 32

Quote:

Cruel mother left her starving children living in squalid house with a dead dog and parrot while she went out partying

This woman is all too common, these days. But isn't it strange how the Feminists who comment here defend such people? Read the comments and you'll find this is true. Is this because this is the sort of woman the Feminist most wish to produce? Rating 13

Quote:

Women heart attack victims 'twice as likely to die as men' as they wait longer to call an ambulance

While I agree with the general point of the article (that women ignore the symptoms of a heart attack) the real reasons are two-fold:......... #1. Women are told by the Feminists that "only men get heart attacks"........#2........The Feminists encourage the idea that women "talk more openly about their health than men." This is complete rubbish; the fact is that thanks to the "modern Feminist lifestyle" women's health have steadily become worse and worse and worse. Red arrow this comment if you like, but you know it's true. Rating 28

Quote:

Not lesbians, yet not heterosexual: Couple learn to adjust to a new type of relationship after sex change

"Men get treated like s***." Yup, gotta agree with that. But it's only the start. By the time you're a few years older you will utterly regret becoming a man. "You have to hold doors, but nobody says thank you. And you don't get compliments, ever'" Don't worry about not getting thanked - be thankful you aren't sworn at by one of the vicious-tongued shrill harpies known as the Feminists. And as for compliments... you will never get them. Men are lucky to even get sex. Compliments are almost unknown, except as sarcastic put-downs. Rating 10

Quote:

Why are men (and women) so scared of female ambition? Vogue boss Nicholas Coleridge explains why women who know what they want are treated with suspicion

Because - as everyone knows but no-one is allowed to admit, females are much much much better bullies than what males are. Just look at the Feminists. Red arrow away! Oh, and don't forget to have the comment removed. Can't have the truth, now, can we? Rating 31

Quote:

Better than a Bond girl: Javier Bardem takes wife Penelope Cruz out on the town ahead of Skyfall premiere

Beautiful girl...OOOPS, males aren't allowed to say that any more, are we? Sorry. Rating 7

Mail Site Profiles (Best & Worst)

Who is online