Funny lolcow Moments

Since I am in Substack’s purgatory (also known as the shadow realm or jail), I will write an article to pass the time. 

Similar to how Hitler wrote Mein Kampf when he was imprisoned at Landsberg.

Today, we will focus on a funny lolcow individual known as “Seven The Archivist”. 

He calls anyone a shill. Why? 

I don’t know. 

Fortunately, he has a nice manual titled “Shill Sniper”, an extensive catalogue of self-seriousness and the assumption that every disagreement must be some sort of conspiracy. 

Firstly, what is a shill? 

According to him: 

> *Astroturfing is that form of disinformation which involves the production of fake “grassroots” movements in order to create a false appearance of consensus. Those conducting an astroturfing campaign are commonly known as “shills”: disinformation agents who present themselves as citizens/consumers expressing their true opinions and testifying to their own experiences when in reality they are being paid to express a particular opinion and/or present scripted “testimony”. (In an earlier, slightly-less-corrupt time, “shilling” mostly referred to the practice by celebrities of publicly endorsing commercial products.) ***

Great. What is disinformation? 

Unfortunately, he doesn’t provide an explicit definition (or in his shitty interpretation) for what disinformation is. 

Though he has mentioned it 62 times in his article. 

I wouldn’t even consider it as an article, as I said before, it is a “manual” about whatever he believes to be “shilling”. 

You think someone like him would be super popular but unfortunately for him, he only has 3 subscribers and basically zero engagement, even though he’s been on the site for longer than I have. 

I remember this guy having around 20 subscribers. 

What? 

Did most of them unsubscribe because of your rambling? 

His relevancy only stems from his Shill Sniper manual (which we will look at shortly), if he hadn’t made that manual then nobody would take him seriously and brush him aside. 

He begins with this “I Was a Paid Shill” confession, a shitty monologue where it basically adds nothing of substance to his manual. It begins where a man claims he was hired by a shadowy San Francisco operation to post philosemitic comments and pro-Israeli posts. He is given binders of talking points, “dialogue pairs,” and instructions on how to derail conversations and threads. Afterwards, he is told to accuse opponents of antisemitism and racism. Funny enough, this is called dramatic irony, where he basically does the same thing to pretty much everyone, if you swapped out with “pro-Israeli”, with “YOU ARE A SHILL!” 

The man becomes emotionally invested in the position he was paid to promote, and the OP treats this story as central evidence (else why would he include this garbage story in).

OP is very good at cataloguing behaviours and patterns he doesn’t like and much less good at noticing when he’s reproducing them. (and we’ll get back to this in a second)

Let’s review his 25 rules of Disinformation.

For starters, almost every item is something that happens in ordinary human disagreement. The notion that normal disagreement, scepticism, insults and mockery as evidence of a coordinated disinformation campaign would essentially mean the framework becomes unfalsifiable.

Secondly, he commented on my post (Russian security guard puts a Muslim in his place).

Unfortunately, scouring through my replies is a very tedious process. Since I am in the Substack purgatory, I am unable to see my reply to the following reply above.

I can recall the fact that he believes that the video is somehow “staged”, I asked him why he believes that, but he provides no proof whatsoever. Then, he accused me of being part of the evil oligarchy and that I am an expendable tool working with them and when they are “finished with the task”, then they will get rid of me.

The best part is that throughout the whole saga, he insists that I am a shill.

I tell him that I am not a shill, but I am glad that if I was paid to make the content that I am producing right now.

It’s like if a NAFO fella insinuated that you were on the Kremlin payroll and you received 6 million rubles per post.

So, let’s see what rules he violated in his reply.

Rule 2 (Become incredulous and indignant)

Rule 4 (Use a straw man)

Rule 7 (Question motives)

And the interaction I had with him would be:

Rule 3 (Create rumour mongers)

Rule 4 (Use a straw man)

Rule 5 (Sidetrack with name calling / ridicule)

Rule 7 (Question motives)

Rule 18 (Emotionalise, Antagonise, and Goad)

Rule 19 (Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs)

He also wanted to dox me for some reason.

He also said that he wishes that I stopped breathing.

So that would fall under Rule 24 (Silence critics) and Rule 18 (Emotionalise, Antagonise, and Goad)

As you can see, the so-called disinformation destroyer is using disinformation tactics.

Very interesting.

Did you know he has a habit of replying to the recipient multiple times?

Same person. Same reply.

Yes, he really did reply 6 times to this individual.

Five replies.

Someone of his intellect should understand that you can summarise your rebuttal in one concise reply.

He should realise that his manual he proudly announced to the world isn’t exclusive for him, it is for everyone to share, and I will utilise it to my desire.

Fin.