David Weigel | June 2, 2006
Illustrator Mike Reed has a vast archive of cartoons illustrating the personalities that animate websites, bulletin boards, and blog comment threads - the Flame Warriors. Take a break, lean back, and enjoy assigning cute cartoon archetypes to your favorite Hit and Run villains.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Dave, I think we did this one before, though hereabouts it might've just been the commenters going off on their own. I remember most of us thinking that we were blends of the types. Still, lots of new people since then for us to classify, label, and dismiss.
Fact: if you think that you do not exist primarily within one of
these archetypes, you are kidding yourself.
:)
Sure, you may stretch into one of the others from time to time, but
you will always return to your natural state eventually.
But of course, clearly I'm an evil clown.
Not sure I'm as evil as this guy, but definitely not to
be trusted to avoid putting in an irrelevant link with a barbed
joke.
Yeah, what's up with Hak, anyway? He's gone positively light on religion, with his arsenal consisting of mere barbs instead of diatribes. I don't think he's abused thoreau or Jennifer recently, either.
Note: if you use the "begin" and "next warrior" buttons you will miss a few of the warriors, e.g. Atheist.
Actually Atheist is the only one that gets left out. Coincidence, or maybe something more?
I suspect an awful lot of us resemble this one, especially from joe or Dave W.'s point of view.
Heh. I'm sure those involved in the immigration threads a few
weeks back will recognize this guy.
Here's a hint, "too much shouting alerts other Warriors to the
opponent's verbal WEAKNESS and emotional EXCITABILITY."
The Flame Warriors have been around forever, but it's one of those sites that never gets old.
"I suspect an awful lot of us resemble this one, especially
from joe or Dave W.'s point of view."
I wish.
Pro Lib - Hak, Jennifer and thoreau have moved their fights over to grylliade. As we speak they are posting broadsides at each other about peak oil.
Actually, I think this one is gaius:
http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ferouscranus.htm
Actually Atheist is the only one that gets left out.
Coincidence, or maybe something more?
Ventifact,
Actually, I think a few others are left out, too. I remember it
happened for a few different profiles the last time I visited the
site.
I aspire to be Godzilla.
If I ever find myself unemployed (god forbid), rest assured I will
master that role someday, and you will all be witness (victim?) to
its terrible glory.
I think we have had a few of these from time to time, although not so many right now.
Pro Libertate,
Yeah, what's up with Hak, anyway? He's gone positively light on
religion, with his arsenal consisting of mere barbs instead of
diatribes. I don't think he's abused thoreau or Jennifer recently,
either.
I realized the error of my ways. I realized that while some of you
may think I have a lot to contribute that I was being too
ill-tempered in the process. And I apologized to anyone I offended.
You can probably thank David for some of this. Also, I don't think
I've gone "light" on religion.
lunchstealer,
Pro Lib - Hak, Jennifer and thoreau have moved their fights
over to grylliade. As we speak they are posting broadsides at each
other about peak oil.
That isn't true of me.
I haven't looked at the website, but aren't these sort of profiles similar in spirit to the surveys one finds in fashion magazines?
Jason Bourne :),
I was kidding about the "light" remark. Sometimes, even I can't
help stooping to the provocative statement. You're a good
contributor to any discussion, and I'm glad that we libertarians,
quasi-libertarians, and not-really-libertarians generally get along
so well these days. Not that we all agree--Zeus save us from
that!
When we looked at this thing last year, I had real trouble figuring
out a single character for me. I imagine that's true of most
people. Not to mention, the typical Reason reader probably
doesn't like to think of himself as easy to classify.
Pro Libertate,
I'm more of a fan of the books than the movies.
When we looked at this thing last year, I had real trouble
figuring out a single character for me. I imagine that's true of
most people. Not to mention, the typical Reason reader probably
doesn't like to think of himself as easy to classify.
Well, any exercise like that is ultimately prone to reductionism
which loses a lot of the flavor of an individual.
PL-II,
Agreed--isn't that the case 95% of the time, anyway?
And, agreed. I've occasionally re-read my own postings and am a
little surprised at how different they can be. I'm prone to
silliness in many postings, but then I go off on some long-winded
soliloquy. One of my frustrations with our current culture is how
much people seem to want to fit into some pattern--watching the
same TV shows, sharing complex sets of political or religious
beliefs with others, etc. Even "rebels" (and this is nothing new)
show a distressing urge to conform. Must be a survival trait :)
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245