hit counter

home | life | tech | ritz | sports | vent | toon | events
I am Back to Discuss Some Things

Steve Tollin Staff Writer
Published 01-27-06
Graphic By: Julie Brennan
Hello my friends, it is I Steven Tollin. What is this you are saying, Steve Tollin, THE Steve Tollin, the one who used to write articles religiously for Whim then all of a sudden out of nowhere seemed to drop off the face of the globe, surely it cannot be? Well, I assure you it is Steve Tollin, the one and only. But why, why are you back Steve? Why did you leave in the first place?

So many questions, such stupid answers, let's see what I can do.

I guess there are a few answers for each question, and every answer is rather stupid honestly, it took me a little while to figure out why I stopped writing articles in the first place. But from my absence I've learned a lot. About myself, about you (the reader) about peoples opinions, ideas, thoughts, and why everyone seems to be obsessed with the notion that even if you want to become a ruffian it's still not cool to have a pet shark.

So anyway back to the questions I was answering, why did I leave? Well after a lot of deliberation and wall staring, I came to the conclusion that more then anything, I felt my articles were no longer being read, and rather all of you were focusing your attention on reading articles, that apparently you hated. I'll explain.

If you are a frequent Whim reader then you know there are certain articles on here that have certain slanted political points of view. I am some what political myself and disagree with these conservative, ultra right-winged, neo-fascist articles, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Seeing the same article every single week that degrades people of different race and sexual orientation is getting rather boring, for me at least, but still this isn't what is at fault. The problem lays in the motivation, which is you, the reader.

Don't take this personal, I still think you are some of the most intelligent and articulate people (you have to be if you read Whim Internet Magazine). And it's obvious that you don't agree with these Nazi--or excuse me "conservative"--articles. But you are encouraging it, you are feeding it. Every time there is one of these articles you spew an almost never ending supply of comments and statements aimed at what only seems to be an attempt to change the writers point of view. I ASSURE you, this is not possible. The only thing that you are accomplishing by doing this is helping to inflate their already pulsating ego. All these comments have been excellent and really have started people talking, but maybe I'm being selfish in this situation, but I feel that myself and other great Whim writers who choose to write without the sole intent of starting a political debate have been kicked aside.

So my friends who were once so loyal and always seemed to be interested in what I had to say, no matter how moronic and pointless I ask a question of you. Next time you read an article that makes you want to poke your eyeballs out from disgust, hold back, bite your lip. Bite it real hard, because although I encourage disagreement to learn from one another, I ask you as a friend to not say anything. Let's see what it can do for us to remain silent in this particular situation. Thank you very much, and let it be known that Whim Internet Magazine is still the coolest online magazine ever. I think we can ALL agree to that.


With so much drama in the R-A-D it's kinda hard being S-T-E-V-E.

Post a New Comment
Name: Email:
Subject of your post:
Your Comment:
No Subject
Posted by Andrew Lent

Ok, we just averted a weird issue where comments were overwriting articles. Everything should be ok now and comments all over the site can now be made. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE notify me at whim@radford.edu if you happen to notice something get overwritten by a comment.

Thank you, enjoy Whim this week!

No Subject
Posted by David

Thumbs up. (not your butt)
No Subject
Posted by markee

In the immortal words of Arthur Fonzarelli "Correct-a-mundo"
No Subject
Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader

It WILL be nice when Whim things go back to normal again. And arguing with these morons is like beating a dead horse, so I really wonder why people get so worked up about it. It's not like the Republican branch of Whim writers have any power to do anything anyway. They're not CONVERTING liberals, for Christ sake. And NOTHING you say will make them see the truth...so please...stop the insanity. Like Steve said: Just stop encouraging them...stop writing and stop feeding the fire. They're idiots...you won't win.
No Subject
Posted by Ray

Is it fair that this only characterizes the Conservatives as the stubborn uneducated ones? We see y'all in the same regard, as thickheaded and stuck in your ways. No, there is no way that we can convert any of you to our side, our only hope is that we can convince you to take a step back and see the topic from ourside. I'm not going to say that you, the socialist, are close minded, and unlike us, can not even begin to comprehend the others' arguments, but I just said it.
No Subject
Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader

Ray, do you honestly take yourself seriously? You're a joke in the eyes of most anyone who frequents Whim, I'm guessing, and of the Christian conservative Tri-force here, you're the one who comes off as a moron in nearly every post you make. Come off it.
No Subject
Posted by Andrew Lent

Ok, I found the Christian conservative Tri-force comment to be utterly hilarious.
hmmm
Posted by Joe

Just out of curiosity, hasn't Whim viewership increased by thousands since those "Nazis" you talk about came to Whim.

How is it fair or kind for you to treat them the same way you accuse them of treating other people?

"Nazis?"
Posted by Rick Snee

While I may not agree with the writers you mention, I find the term "nazi" in poor taste. Why trivialize the group responsible for one of the worst atrocities in human history by applying it to them?

Besides, wouldn't your namecalling and the fact you made an entry about them counter the arguement you're making?

I may not always like what they have to say, but that's the beauty of this magazine and the comments section.
No Subject
Posted by Steve

I agree that the term "Nazi" wasn't used in greatest of taste, but I it is true that the "Chrstian Conservative Tri-Force" has said some far worse things in their articles. I didn't write this article for anyone to completely overthink it, I think really that's what I'm attacking. I felt like the only reason that discussions were starting on Whim was because people wanted to have political debates, and honestly I was simply feeling left out. I felt left out because I continued to write articles that I put effort into, but no one could care less because they were all too busy bickering with one another.
?
Posted by Patrick

"I'm not going to say that you, the socialist, are close minded, and unlike us, can not even begin to comprehend the others' arguments, but I just said it."

::blink::

I don't think Cracker Jack makes a Decoder Ring for this particular passage. Anyone want to translate it into something that makes more sense than it does now?

No Subject
Posted by Andrew Lent

I'd say the problem wasn't that people were ignoring you, Steve (cause I was still reading your articles), but it was the fact that no one really commented on articles until there was something to debate about. Before there might have been a few comments on an article here or there, but once the readership became polarized, comments couldn't be held back.

Keep writing, Steve, everyone needs a break from the really intense stuff. I dislike a section that isn't diverse!

No Subject
Posted by Peter

"I'm not going to say that you, the socialist, are close minded, and unlike us, can not even begin to comprehend the others' arguments, but I just said it."

I don't think Cracker Jack makes a Decoder Ring for this particular passage. Anyone want to translate it into something that makes more sense than it does now?

A simple Decoder Ring isn't going to handle this one. I think we'll need a team of experts fluent in Moronese to translate this one. ;)
No Subject
Posted by Steve

You make a good point Andrew and I agree with you. Thank you for reading my articles and keeping together a totally awesome internet magazine.
Steve pricks hearts in the bushes of beers
Posted by Heidi

But do bats eat cats?
No Subject
Posted by Bree

No matter how long idiots blather on, people will always need the funny in their life, and that funny is you my dear.
No Subject
Posted by Ray

Sorry, it was confusing now that I reread it. Basically I am saying that you can't see our point of view. We see yours sometimes, but find it truly amazing how asanine some of your ideas are. You dont even seem to be able to comprehend our side of the argument, and that is why there is rarely an argument and you resort to name calling. I am not saying agree with everything I have to say, but merely understand where I am coming from. Dont dismiss it right off the bat because you can't practice what you preach and remain open minded through a paragraph just because it may contain something you dont agree with.
No Subject
Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader

You say "you" alot, but how many debates has Steve been involved in with you?
No Subject
Posted by Peter

You dont even seem to be able to comprehend our side of the argument, and that is why there is rarely an argument and you resort to name calling.

Ummm, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you the one that used the terms "raghead" and "towelhead" and other such phrases in some recent posts?
No Subject
Posted by Jim Lawson

Where is Erskine in all of this? God help you when and if he reads this one.
No Subject
Posted by Ray

Still need clarification I see. Rarely, if ever, will you see me straight out call someone a d-bag as Rick did in another article. I use slurs like that when I am generalizing something, usually when I dont agree. However, you will be hard pressed to find me attacking someone specifically like is done constantly to me. Now dont get me wrong, I'm not crying about it. I truly dont care if people on here dont like me. I use my article and attacks on me because I can speak for them and there is proof 2 clicks away. However, I am just saying many times people resort to attacking the person writing the post and not the substance itself. Really, I'm not trying to be contraversial, I dont care why people do it, I am just pointing out a fact that I seriously doubt anyone can refute.
No Subject
Posted by Peter

I use slurs like that when I am generalizing something, usually when I dont agree.

Here's the thing: the use of slurs in any kind of argument severely cheapens it. You can't expect people to take you seriously when all they see is words like "towelhead" and "faggot" and the such. Maybe one of the reasons "we" can't see it your way is because of the way it's presented.
No Subject
Posted by THE Blake, who apparently is a Nazi according to Steve

"And it's obvious that you don't agree with these Nazi--or excuse me "conservative"--articles."

"neo-fascist articles"

Communist.
Socialist.
Anti-American.
Bleeding Heart.
Knee-Jerker.

We can all play the name-calling game, Steve.
No Subject
Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader

Umm, yeah, Blake...those aren't all synonymous with each other. Aren't you a political science major? Why don't you go ask a professor to explain the differences to you. Do you want to bring back McCarthyism?
No Subject
Posted by THE Blake

"Umm, yeah, Blake...those aren't all synonymous with each other."
Sure they are. They all describe the Democratic party, partially if not fully.

Contact Info:
befought@radford.edu
http://blog.myspace.com/bburgblake1
No Subject
Posted by Some Anonymous Whim Reader

Eh, no. Or, if you want to play ball that way... RACIST. GREEDY. HYPOCRITICAL. There, those all describe the Republican Party.
No Subject
Posted by Ray

Sure they are and here is why:

Communist=I prefer socialist, but essentially on paper socialism and communism are the same.
Socialist=Social welfare programs have some merit, but when you want to void personal responsibility completely and have the unrealistic idea that all people should be the exact same in terms of economics you are kidding yourself. Instead of preaching equality across the board, why dont you try to create opportunity, and then when those who will fail fail, realize they had the chance and it isnt the fault of an opressive society.
Anti-American. You care more about people in other countries, people who want to kill you (Read that again because I mean it. Do you think the terrorist give a crap about the fact you dont like Bush? They kill their own people, why would they care about you?) So why do you spend your time defending them and weakening our country? Because you are un-American
Bleeding Heart. You guys are relentless. Once you get on your path, no matter how wrong you will be proven, you want to hear what is going to support your narrowmindedness.
Knee-Jerker. The democratic party is for the uneducated. Instead of playing to peoples' logic, you instead rely on raw emotion in order to trick those who cant think for themselves to vote your way. Tax cuts for example: If you told every poor person they would get $1000 for voting for you, a majority of them wouldnt care to think of where that money would come from, the economic impact, or the fact it isnt there money. All they see if free money in front of them because you guys have manipulated people who shouldnt be voting into casting a ballot for you. It's not politics for the demoncrats, its theater and who can sell the best sob story.

No Subject
Posted by stella k

I'm with Steve! Boycott the Politics!
Hello, Pot.
Posted by Rick Snee

Bleeding Heart. You guys are relentless. Once you get on your path, no matter how wrong you will be proven, you want to hear what is going to support your narrowmindedness.

You only have about 3 comments you post on here over and over again.
No Subject
Posted by Steve

Sorry I haven't responded to any of the stuff you guys wrote, but this is what I have to say.

I agree that the name calling was childish, I'm sorry about that, but it is true that at times some of you have said some pretty awful things. That's not the point however. The point is that I was making a comment on how it seems that all Whim has become is a political debate board. Although these articles are good because they get people talking I miss articles that were light hearted and more of a laugh. Don't worry, you can expect to not see me writing too much more like this.

your pal, "Socialist"(which I don't think is such a bad thing) Steve
That point is good
Posted by Rick Snee

We need more humor!
No Subject
Posted by Andrew Lent

We do need more humor, but you know what, we only get it when the light-hearted humorous people submit. I know Zoe and I crave seeing more in Vent than purely religious and political articles, but they defintiely have their place too. So, that being said, please keep submitting Steve, get your friends to submit, get total strangers to submit.

SUBMIT YOUR WORK HERE!


No Subject
Posted by THE Blake

"(which I don't think is such a bad thing)"
...and that's sad.
No Subject
Posted by THE Blake

"I know Zoe and I crave seeing more in Vent than purely religious and political articles, but they defintiely have their place too."
...for example?
No Subject
Posted by Steve

"(which I don't think is such a bad thing)"
...and that's sad.

*sigh*
Inside Whim
Visit Our Sponsors