This is the Title of a Typical Incendiary Blog Post
This sentence contains a provocative statement that attracts the readers’ attention, but really only has very little to do with the topic of the blog post. This sentence claims to follow logically from the first sentence, though the connection is actually rather tenuous. This sentence claims that very few people are willing to admit the obvious inference of the last two sentences, with an implication that the reader is not one of those very few people. This sentence expresses the unwillingness of the writer to be silenced despite going against the popular wisdom. This sentence is a sort of drum roll, preparing the reader for the shocking truth to be contained in the next sentence.
This sentence contains the thesis of the blog post, a trite and obvious statement cast as a dazzling and controversial insight.
13 thoughts on “Metafiction: A Flame War”
This reply pretends to relate to the thesis, and includes a mild counter-statement. The main reason for the reply, though, is to distract the author of the blog post so that everyone has time to get some popcorn while an out-of-context-quote is put up on twitter.
This internet, what will become of it?
This is a spambot post, that turns up after the debate has died down, and whilst apperaring to be enthusiastic about the post’s content, doesn’t engage with that content at all.
This is the comment that appears after even the spambot posts, “nercroing” the thread.
And this is the comment that compares the post’s author to Hitler, or other commentators to Hitler, or everyone to Hitler.
And this is were the real flame war starts: the comment that picks up the Hitler comparison, gnaws on it, and then attacks the one who made this comment.
This is the comment that embeds the YouTube video where Hitler finds out John won’t accept him as a Big Other contributor:
(Well, if you squint.)
This comment misconstrues the comment above and throws itself into a furor over der Führer, and attempts to shift away the dialogue to a conversation about William Kohler, William Gass’s unreliable narrator in The Tunnel.
Gass (God) wins. Law.
…and yet a man.
This is the comment that points out the relationship between Godwin’s Law and the Gass Laws, or the laws describing Gass’s Ideals.
It’s also, sadly, the comment that cements the thread’s devolution into inane punning, a fate worse than flaming accusations of being Hitler.
This post is about the physical properties of gas as a state of matter.
Gas is one of three classical states of matter. Near absolute zero, a substance exists as a solid. As heat is added to this substance it melts into a liquid at its melting point (see phase change), boils into a gas at its boiling point, and if heated high enough would enter a plasma state in which the electrons are so energized that they leave their parent atoms from within the gas.
A pure gas may be made up of individual atoms (e.g. a noble gas or atomic gas like neon), elemental molecules made from one type of atom (e.g. oxygen), or compound molecules made from a variety of atoms (e.g. carbon dioxide).
A gas mixture would contain a variety of pure gases much like the air. What distinguishes a gas from liquids and solids is the vast separation of the individual gas particles. This separation usually makes a colorless gas invisible to the human observer.
The interaction of gas particles in the presence of electric and gravitational fields are considered negligible.
This post picks up the idea of “interaction”, finds interesting parallels between gas particles and blog posters by definition, and leads to a surprising emergent conclusion:
Interaction is a kind of action that occurs as two or more objects have an effect upon one another. The idea of a two-way effect is essential in the concept of interaction, as opposed to a one-way causal effect. A closely related term is interconnectivity, which deals with the interactions of interactions within systems: combinations of many simple interactions can lead to surprising emergent phenomena.