Thought-Bombs: Are You Guilty?

[Tough Grits]

I came up with this word and definition based on some negative status updates and/or posts that I have seen posted over the years on various social media sites. I sat down and thought about what that kind of negativity should be called. So, I came up with the following word and definition. Well, it turns out that a thought-bomb already exists as a word...but with a different meaning. No big deal, lots of words have multiple meanings!! Below is my definition of a "thought-bomb".

Thought-bomb: a very specific, negative message to a named or unnamed person or persons in order to inflict damage on social media sites. A thought-bomb is like a suicide bomb: it hurts the bomber, the intended target, and the innocent victims near the bomb--in the case of social media sites, the innocent victims would be all those who read the thought-bomb. Thought-bombers cheapen their own character by throwing a weapon publicly to hurt another, and they embarrass their targets and themselves by bringing the situation into public light.

[M_T_E]

I am guilty of this, but only in circumstances where I have been wronged by the person who I targeted.

Getting even isn't always the answer, but when you steal expensive equipment from me and lie when confronted.. Well.. I get agitated.

[Tough Grits]

I am guilty of this, but only in circumstances where I have been wronged by the person who I targeted.

Getting even isn't always the answer, but when you steal expensive equipment from me and lie when confronted.. Well.. I get agitated.

At least you are honest about it. No judgement here.

I just hate it when people say that social media is bad, or that the internet is bad.

We are the one who have the choice to use or misuse the internet or social media. As such, we are the ones who need to learn some social media etiquette.

Not that I am volunteering, or anything. After all, my name is Tough Grits...not Sweet Grits. LOL What would I know about social etiquette? HA HA:huh:

[Blackmarch]

I came up with this word and definition based on some negative status updates and/or posts that I have seen posted over the years on various social media sites. I sat down and thought about what that kind of negativity should be called. So, I came up with the following word and definition. Well, it turns out that a thought-bomb already exists as a word...but with a different meaning. No big deal, lots of words have multiple meanings!! Below is my definition of a "thought-bomb".

Thought-bomb: a very specific, negative message to a named or unnamed person or persons in order to inflict damage on social media sites. A thought-bomb is like a suicide bomb: it hurts the bomber, the intended target, and the innocent victims near the bomb--in the case of social media sites, the innocent victims would be all those who read the thought-bomb. Thought-bombers cheapen their own character by throwing a weapon publicly to hurt another, and they embarrass their targets and themselves by bringing the situation into public light.

So in other words, trolls, flamers, and conspiracy theorist crackjobs?

[Tough Grits]

So in other words, trolls, flamers, and conspiracy theorist crackjobs?

Huh? Not clear on what a troll or flamer is. And I don't think that believing in a conspiracy now and then means a person is a crackjob. :)

Actually, I wrote that definition after reading a friend post a status update that basically ripped a member of my family to shreds.

Even though no names were mentioned, everybody in our circle (friends, friends of friends, church members) knew exactly the who, what, and why of the post.

That was my original motivation behind the word and definition. Just because people have drama in their lives, doesn't mean everybody else wants or needs to know about it.

Hope that clears up my intent and purpose for the word & definition.

[Blackmarch]

Huh? Not clear on what a troll or flamer is. And I don't think that believing in a conspiracy now and then means a person is a crackjob. :)

Actually, I wrote that definition after reading a friend post a status update that basically ripped a member of my family to shreds.

Even though no names were mentioned, everybody in our circle (friends, friends of friends, church members) knew exactly the who, what, and why of the post.

That was my original motivation behind the word and definition. Just because people have drama in their lives, doesn't mean everybody else wants or needs to know about it.

Hope that clears up my intent and purpose for the word & definition.

Flamers are internet denizens that generally directly attack individuals and ideas, usually in the form of name calling and sharp unfounded criticisms sort of ilk.

Trolls are basically sneaky flamers who like to get people riled up by introducing volatile topics, discussion hijackings, argument (often illogical, unresponsive, or very yellow journalistic), rumor/insinuation , and accusation. In less restricted areas they tend to morph into active flamers. One common subspecies of troll is the drive-by troll- an individual who drops a controversial post or accusation then disappears from the conversation to watch the other parties tear each other up over it.

Conspiracy theorist crackjobs are those who see everything that might potentially counter their view as an attack or some form of falsification with such zealotry they often turn into trolls and flamers.

anyways internet 101

Edited January 21, 2013 by Blackmarch

[Backroads]

I've seen these thought-bombs, so I guess I've been guilty of reading them.

I like to think I'm too sweet to make one myself.

[Tough Grits]

Flamers are internet denizens that generally directly attack individuals and ideas, usually in the form of name calling and sharp unfounded criticisms sort of ilk.

Trolls are basically sneaky flamers who like to get people riled up by introducing volatile topics, discussion hijackings, argument (often illogical, unresponsive, or very yellow journalistic), rumor/insinuation , and accusation. In less restricted areas they tend to morph into active flamers. One common subspecies of troll is the drive-by troll- an individual who drops a controversial post or accusation then disappears from the conversation to watch the other parties tear each other up over it.

Conspiracy theorist crackjobs are those who see everything that might potentially counter their view as an attack or some form of falsification with such zealotry they often turn into trolls and flamers.

anyways internet 101

Thank you!! I now understand!

Here is what I thought:

Troll = Mythical creature that stinks and needs a shave.

Flamer = Super Hero who is on fire.

Conspiracy Theorist Crackjob = Me...since I believe in Big Foot and Loch Ness. LOL LOL

[Tough Grits]

I've seen these thought-bombs, so I guess I've been guilty of reading them.

I like to think I'm too sweet to make one myself.

If you have read them, then you were the innocent victim.

I would like to think that I am too sweet too...but I am not.

Actually, I come up with thought-bombs all the time...but then I remember that throwing tantrums is inappropriate and that throwing stones is a sin.

So then I look to the scriptures and ponder the matter. Two things happen when I do this. I will either forget the matter altogether and get over my anger or frustration, or I will end up writing something that helps me build my testimony. Which I then share with others, which might help them too, if they have faced or are facing the same thing.

[Traveler]

Many of my posts are intended to cause thinking. Mostly because often it looks to me that some arrive at conclusions without thinking the questions through very well. So I ask questions - not because I already know an answer or believe an answer but in attempt that others question their conclusions.

However, there are some that think every one that questions their opinion is their enemy and as such they become angry because someone (their enemy) has questioned their opinion. Am I sorry then that I asked the question? Sometimes!

The Traveler

[Tough Grits]

Many of my posts are intended to cause thinking. Mostly because often it looks to me that some arrive at conclusions without thinking the questions through very well. So I ask questions - not because I already know an answer or believe an answer but in attempt that others question their conclusions.

However, there are some that think every one that questions their opinion is their enemy and as such they become angry because someone (their enemy) has questioned their opinion. Am I sorry then that I asked the question? Sometimes!

The Traveler

No, Traveler, a question would not be a thought-bomb...at least not according to my definition.

Thought-bombs run more along the lines of the following being posted as a status update on facebook (or other social media sites): "I can't stand some people! Who do they think are to embarrass me in front of my family? Just because they are family too, doesn't mean they have the right to get in my business! Next time, I won't be so nice, and I will show them exactly how awful they make others feel!!"

I completely made that up, but even as I typed I could feel the negativity of the post.

Usually, when somebody posts a status update like the one above, others in the "circle" know who the comment is being directed at and they likely already know what happened.

Basically, a thought-bomb is heated, angry gossip, insults, or threats made publicly for everybody to read. The person posting it thinks it is okay, because they didn't name any names (even though most people reading the post already know who it is about or will find out soon by asking others), and they think that since it is their facebook page that it is okay to type tantrums that publicly hurt, shame, or attack others.

Agency comes with a price. Just because somebody has the right to do something, does not mean that they should.

Nothing is wrong with questions. I LOVE questions! I use them all time!

But what I don't like, is when somebody disguises an attack as a question. Or when somebody has already made up their mind that they don't agree and do not like the opinion of the person posting, but then instigate a little contention and "right fighting" in the guise of curiosity or clarification.

A little etiquette goes a long way. When we ask questions, it should be with civility and a true desire to converse and share...not attack, ridicule, or belittle.

Besides, opinions can't be argued...they can only be shared.

Which, by the way, is just my opinion.