Originally the second. It’s possible some of the first have picked up on it, but they’re hardly noteworthy enough to shift the meaning and make it into anything other than a successful troll.
So a successful troll it remains, something to make some people all angry over what they believe is a righteous cause. It makes the angry angry, it makes the trolls happy, and it makes the rest of us anywhere from mildly amused to moderately confused. Everyone wins.
Except that at the same time you are making it more and more acceptable to let people think that you are a white supremacist. And that’s what liberates the white supremacist mov meant from social disapproval.
With more than half the country convinced that the current administration is emboldening racists to unmask and express themselves publically, I wouldn’t be so confident that only a few people have this perception.
It was stupid because it unnecessarily gave people (like yourself) an excuse to see her as a troll rather than someone more mature and sophisticated than your average 4chan basement dweller.
But we all do stupid things sometimes. To err is human.
Then perhaps “social disapproval” should focus on actual white supremacists? It dilutes the label when you call people who troll on the internet for lulz “horrible people”. Why not save that label for, you know, actual “horrible people”? Right now, your side looks like the boy who cried “wolf” when it comes to labeling people “horrible”.
I think the GQ answer was given some time ago. I don’t see a lot of point in sending this trainwreck to another forum, but if anyone wants to continue this discussion you may open a new thread.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator