A man named Scott Johnson has been a prolific commenter on Frank Report. Most regular readers know him and newer readers know him by his alternative signature “LOL”.
Frankly, I am puzzled by Scott’s rudeness, since when I appeared on his podcast, he was an excellent host. I have spoken to him on the phone and he’s always acted well mannered. SP, why is he rude to everyone on this website?
Another commenter, Nutjob, explaining to a new commenter why Scott was being rude to her, had this to say about Scott:
Over the years, Scott Johnson has posted things on Frank Report that are unforgivable. Not that he cares to be forgiven – he has never once apologized and doubles down on everything he’s ever typed.
Now that Frank is often censoring him, you only see his comments as often sniping, instigating, sometimes obnoxious, and nearly 100% disrespectful. This is only a one or two out of 10 when it comes to what we were accustomed to in the past with the viciousness of his posts.
Scott has run off many people from Frank Report and is the single biggest reason that the comment section of FR doesn’t always have the best reputation. Heidi and others have wanted Frank to stop Scott’s behavior, and are not happy in how long it took to mitigate it. For years, many have wanted Scott completely booted from FR. Even now, when you see people like Susan Dones comment, they do it with boxing gloves on, because they remember the past attacks.
***
Scott is my lesson on free speech. I used to think I should allow all comments, bar none. But Scott would drive everyone away.
So I decided to limit free speech. I have to treat this website like I would my own home. If someone comes into my house and insults other guests, I am not going to invite him again. Scott has been insulting my guests for years.
I understand Scott is different from me. My first inclination is to like people and find common ground, to encourage them. Scott looks for disagreement and disrespect. Sometimes he thinks it’s funny; usually, it’s not.
Perhaps he thinks there are those who admire his snarky, snappy insults. I have heard from no one who said they admire it.
Actually, Scott is the reason I started the policy of manually approving comments in the first place. Prior to that, I had a setting where all comments were automatically approved and appeared live as soon as they were written.
Because Scott was ceaselessly belittling commenters, I had to switch to manual approval.
Scott is one of two commenters who require my personal approval. That means my associate editors may not approve a comment by Scott because it is most likely intended to insult another commenter.
Sometimes Scott makes excellent points. However, it takes too much time to review them to find the gems.
The reason it is time-consuming is that Scott usually writes one-liners – zingers – snappy putdowns. In order to understand whether he is putting down, for instance, Keith Raniere [fair game] or another commenter [not fair game], I have to go to the original post and read the comment he is replying to, to see if he is belittling a commenter.
Usually, he is.
Just today a commenter used the word “prolix” to describe her writing style. I was initially pleased to see Scott agreeing with another commenter. He wrote, “I agree about the prolix part, even though I had to look up the word to see what it means. LOL.”
Since I had a bunch of Scott Johnson comments in que, waiting to be approved, I pushed the approve button hastily. Then I thought better. I looked up prolix: “(Of speech or writing) using or containing too many words; tediously lengthy.”
Scott was agreeing only in order to insult the commenter.
There are other commenters who, if they disagree, attack the person, instead of debate the issue. But Scott is the main problem. Of the last 200 comments I deleted, 116 were from Scott.
To give some examples of comments from Scott I deleted:
And people like you will keep reminding them, ad infinitem. LOL
[referring to another commenter] Healthy debate cannot occur without a healthy brain. LOL
Go back to making sausage – the song was picked by the Starz network, not NXIVM. LOL
You need to grow up. LOL
Let the record show this person is too drunk to click on the link and contact Scott to be on his podcast, and the rest of you are too scared. LOL
I’ll make a mental note that you’re a Libtard. LOL
Your question, as usual, is a stupid one. LOL
Go to hell. LOL
[to a German commenter] Like the error Germans made in supporting Hitler? LOL
Do you ever get tired of making the same, tired comments? LOL
Blah, blah, blah – same old crappola. LOL
I suffer every time I read one of your comments. LOL
Scott would rather have an enema than interact with a Nutjob, too. LOL
[To me] Also, your presumption that I care whether you publish my comments is unfounded – I’m perfectly happy with only you reading them, as most people commenting here are idiots. LOL
Ironically, Scott thinks most commenters are idiots and they think the same of him. And yet it is Scott who diminishes debate, by attacking those seeking to add something to the conversation.What needs or lacking does he have that makes him act this way? The lesson is mine. I’m learning from Scott.
Another commenter wrote of him, “Scott says the most disgusting things, and when you allow it, I wonder WHY you do. You like Scott to stir the pot, and you never correct his statements… If you’re going to let Scott provoke and say ugly things, allow the ugly response. If you want civility, put your uncivil dog on a leash.”
I think that is a fair comment. I can’t put him on a leash. I can only put him up for adoption at the SPCA.
Frank Report will have controversial and important topics to report on in the coming weeks. It will spark debate and I want it to be civil.
If, dear readers, you do not see the “LOL” anymore, you will know the reason.
I can assure you the next time Scott gratuitously insults another commenter, I will stop sifting through Scott’s comments. He will be the first and, hopefully, the last person banned on this platform.
And Scott, If we do meet again, why, we shall smile; If not, why then, this parting was well made.
