Scott Adams: Dilbert creator, entrepreneur, troll

mario_c · Apr 16, 2011

I don't know whether to :ROFL:

or

. What do you think? Is this a Wally-esque PR fail or just pointy headed stupidity?

Personally, I love Dilbert but I've also followed Scott Adams' writings and blogging for a long time. He is in fact brilliant, and amazingly witty and insightful. But he has come across as something of a sociopath for awhile. Too much judging those not as brilliant as him? Well, what do you think?

regdog · Apr 16, 2011

I've always thought Dilbert was a funny strip but I had no idea what a jerk Adams was. Too bad someone with that talent has to be so pathetic.

FocusOnEnergy · Apr 16, 2011

The first thing I saw on that page has plunged me into deepest mourning. Encyclopedia Dramatica has been taken down and sanitized into a SFW site. Oh, the humanity.

Scott Adams sockpuppetry and other stupidity is why it's best not to look at the people who create the entertainment we enjoy too closely. Otherwise you end up watching Charlie Sheen's videos and wondering how this man ever had a career doing anything.

Focus

Amadan · Apr 16, 2011

He's a misogynistic cretin who thinks having a high IQ makes him smart.

What a surprise, he's a libertarian too.

Ink-Stained Wretch · Apr 16, 2011

Amadan said:
He's a misogynistic cretin who thinks having a high IQ makes him smart.

What a surprise, he's a libertarian too.

Nothing wrong with being libertarian; I'm one myself. But Adams' take on it is ... interesting.

I read that Metafilter thread when it first came out, though abandoned it long before Adams exposed his sockpuppetry. That went beyond bizarre. I'll admit, I've done Google searches solely to find blogs or forums discussing things I've written, and of course it's annoying to read a thread and think "Wow, these people completely missed my point," but I'd never dream of starting a sockpuppet account in hope of changing the course of that thread. And unlike Scott Adams, I actually need the money I get for my articles; if too many readers decide they don't like my stuff, I'd suffer actual financial consequences. Yet I still wouldn't resort to sockpuppetry. But Adams, who doesn't even need the money the WSJ pays him, does? A rich multimillionaire who could afford to vacation anyplace in the world, buy anything he wants -- and he chooses to spend his time trolling blogs that criticize him? That's pathetic.

mario_c · Apr 16, 2011

Of course, he can troll via Blackberry from San Sebastian. That's what separates him from your garden variety internet savant.

And I want to be clear that describing him as brilliant does not mean excusing his sexism. Even geniuses act stupid sometimes - Scott Adams said "Everyone is an idiot at least some of the time, including me", before he proved it.
The worst thing is that the WSJ was pretty interesting. Yeah, he's smug about his impossibly successful life (remind you of anyone?) and his "B students should be segregated" shtick is borderline bigotry, but his advice to young entrepreneurs is pretty strong.
My take, like I know anything about it.

Alessandra Kelley · Apr 16, 2011

That's kind of weird and creepy. Has Scott Adams been getting worse lately? I always knew he was snarky and smug about being smart (like that's so rare). But this seems like borderline losing it.

Ink-Stained Wretch · Apr 16, 2011

Alessandra Kelley said:
That's kind of weird and creepy. Has Scott Adams been getting worse lately? I always knew he was snarky and smug about being smart (like that's so rare). But this seems like borderline losing it.

I agree. Thing is -- so far as I know, I don't actually post on Metafilter -- you can't just register out of the blue; you have to make a small token payment via credit card (to filter out the trolls or something). Getting an anonymous email account is quite easy, but Adams presumably paid that $5 or $10 registration fee with a credit card made out in the name of Scott Adams, and the Certified Genius never once suspected that the Metafilter mods might make the connection between "Scott Adams the new Mefite who strongly defends the Dilbert creator" and "Scott Adams, the guy who created Dilbert."

EMaree · Apr 17, 2011

I had no idea Scott Adams acted like this. How disappointing.

Perks · Apr 17, 2011

Alessandra Kelley said:
That's kind of weird and creepy. Has Scott Adams been getting worse lately? I always knew he was snarky and smug about being smart (like that's so rare). But this seems like borderline losing it.

That's the way it reads to me as well. Perhaps the incandescence inside his skull slightly over-heated the don't-be-a-dick filter. It happens. Poor thing.

Ian Isaro · Apr 18, 2011

Though Dilbert is the only comic strip over twenty years old that I still bother to read, the writer hasn't really impressed me with his behavior and thoughts. I've generally ignored those, but this one is more pathetic than a behavior that can be ignored.

Manuel Royal · Apr 18, 2011

Adams replied to a complaint I sent him once. A series of Dilbert strips portrayed skeptics as silly people who demand unreasonable levels of proof for commonplace claims; when I complained, Adams rightly pointed out that "accuracy is a heavy burden to place on satire."

This mishigas, though, just seems pathetic. I remember being smug about a high IQ. Have to really think back, though -- because I was 19. Most people grow out of that sort of thing.

Quite possibly a lot of my favorite authors would turn out to be jerks, SOBs, or damaged, if I knew anything about them personally. I try to separate the creator from the work.

Laurathewriter · Apr 18, 2011

I don't think Mr Adams is a happy man.

Ink-Stained Wretch · Apr 18, 2011

Another thought occurs to me -- I'm still amazed that the guy registered on a site which requires a credit card, and thought he could remain anonymous -- but: there seems to be one particular type of stupidity found almost exclusively in people who are otherwise very intelligent: the apparent belief "If someone is less intelligent than I am, that means they have no intelligence at all." It would require at least some intellectual ability to make the connection between "Scott Adams, our newest commenter" and "Scott Adams of Dilbert fame," and it requires great stupidity to think the guys who run Metafilter lack the intellectual ability to make that connection.

BenPanced · Apr 18, 2011

Ah, yes. A protracted version of I WAS JUST KIDDING DON'T YOU JELOSE LOOSERS HAVE A SENSE OF HUMORZ?! The defense of the weak-minded.

mario_c · Apr 18, 2011

BenPanced said:
Ah, yes. A protracted version of I WAS JUST KIDDING DON'T YOU JELOSE LOOSERS HAVE A SENSE OF HUMORZ?! The defense of the weak-minded.

Ironically, his comedy writing talent is what buried him here. He can't say his sexist rant was "ironic" or meant in a "humorous" spirit. He can't say we just don't understand the "humor" there because we don't subscribe to his blog. He obviously knows better. He has to.
Worst case scenario: He thinks anyone who doesn't belong to his club is stupid and this gives him carte blanche to sound off at people at what is now becoming a dangerous intensity. Again, remind you of anyone?

mario_c · Apr 18, 2011

Needless to say, Scott is fighting back! Defending his trolling ways ("I'd be lying if I said it wasn't fun") and playing the martyr with a book to pitch card, this is great whackadoo stuff. Racism and creationism comes up too.

benbradley · Apr 18, 2011

I've only occasionally read his comic strip, mostly back in the mid-late '90's in EE Times, an engineering trade magazine. At the time I thought he was "just an engineer" like the rest of us, drawing the cartoon specifically for EE Times. No, I rarely read newspaper comics.

I have to admit this was a stupid thing to do. He should have signed up with an ID like ScottA, so people would believe he was just some jerk trying to impersonate Scott Adams. He probably could have gotten away with that for longer.

Ink-Stained Wretch said:
I agree. Thing is -- so far as I know, I don't actually post on Metafilter -- you can't just register out of the blue; you have to make a small token payment via credit card (to filter out the trolls or something).

Well, that really worked in this case!

Was Metafilter the big site that went to a token pay for membership? No doubt several have done that. I recall a few years ago reading about the owner of such a site doing that to keep the site from imploding due to trolls and such. Maybe I'm thinking of SomethingAwful? There are a lot of sites I've heard of but never checked out.

Perks said:
Getting an anonymous email account is quite easy,

And it usually stays anonymous unless you're just the right type of a jerk that the mods decide to investigate you rather than just delete your account...

but Adams presumably paid that $5 or $10 registration fee with a credit card made out in the name of Scott Adams, and the Certified Genius never once suspected that the Metafilter mods might make the connection between "Scott Adams the new Mefite who strongly defends the Dilbert creator" and "Scott Adams, the guy who created Dilbert."

Click to expand...

No doubt he could have afforded to get a credit card in a different name. Not that I've done it, but I understand it's easy enough and perfectly legal to go by a different name (like a "pen name") as long as you're not doing it to do fraud or something else illegal. To go with my above idea, I'd suggest "Scott Anderson" and have fun with even the mods accusing him of not being Scott Adams.

Even still, if he was "causing trouble" they could (well, they'd probably just delete the account, but if they wanted to...) ask his ISP (maybe even get a court order if needed - it probably always is thesedays) to find out who he REALLY is. THAT would be an interesting headline: "Scott Adams Trolls Internet Pretending To Be Himself." There are so many jerks online thesedays, it can be hard to distinguish between them.

Perks said:

That's the way it reads to me as well. Perhaps the incandescence inside his skull slightly over-heated the don't-be-a-dick filter. It happens. Poor thing.

Click to expand...

It's good to see someone in this thread with compassion. I worked in cubicles for a few years (the same period of time I was regularly reading Dilbert), and it can just about drive one crazy.

But wait, did Adams ever actually WORK in a cubicle?

Lastly, it's not real until it's mentioned in a XKCD comic.

Click to expand...

benbradley · Apr 18, 2011

mario_c said:
...
Again, remind you of anyone?

Is he saying Scientology only has a five percent cure rate?

Adobedragon · Apr 19, 2011

mario_c said:
Needless to say, Scott is fighting back! Defending his trolling ways ("I'd be lying if I said it wasn't fun") and playing the martyr with a book to pitch card, this is great whackadoo stuff. Racism and creationism comes up too.

As someone who worked in the IT/technical field, I used to find his comics amusing. Once he revealed himself as a creationist/intelligent design wackaloon, he got consigned to my Do Not Read list.

Ink-Stained Wretch · Apr 19, 2011

benbradley said:
No doubt he could have afforded to get a credit card in a different name. Not that I've done it, but I understand it's easy enough and perfectly legal to go by a different name (like a "pen name") as long as you're not doing it to do fraud or something else illegal. To go with my above idea, I'd suggest "Scott Anderson" and have fun with even the mods accusing him of not being Scott Adams.

Sure, you can get a credit card in a different name, but it's not an automatic process; you'd have to wait some time between your initial application and the actual issuing of the card. If he didn't have such a card in hand when he saw that Metafilter thread, there's no way he could've applied for one and got it in time to register and post while that thread was still current.

Plus, if you read the thread, it's obvious the mods knew who he was and told him "Out yourself or we'll do it for you." I highly doubt he registered with an email that clearly indicated who he was, so Occam's razor suggests it was the credit card that let the mods know his identity.

mario_c · Apr 19, 2011

benbradley said:
Is he saying Scientology only has a five percent cure rate?

That's an interesting take. I was thinking of Mad Mel, but that works too...

WildScribe · Apr 19, 2011

Adobedragon said:
As someone who worked in the IT/technical field, I used to find his comics amusing. Once he revealed himself as a creationist/intelligent design wackaloon, he got consigned to my Do Not Read list.

Um... he says IN HIS BLOG that he believes in evolution.

James D. Macdonald · Apr 20, 2011

I wouldn't rule out the possibility of organic disease. A small stroke?

Manuel Royal · Apr 23, 2011

Adobedragon said:
As someone who worked in the IT/technical field, I used to find his comics amusing. Once he revealed himself as a creationist/intelligent design wackaloon, he got consigned to my Do Not Read list.

I hadn't heard that before; surprising.

I took a look at his blog; he says this:

Scott Adams said:
I've also famously predicted that the theory of evolution will be debunked in my lifetime. That sounds like crazy Creationist talk, and a direct contradiction to my statement that evolution is a scientific fact. The context for that prediction is the notion that a future Einstein might someday demonstrate that our common sense understanding of the passage of time is flawed. If that happens, every part of our observed reality will be debunked, sort of. Instead of focusing on evolution, I could have predicted that the history of your daily commute to work will be debunked. It's the same point but less catchy.

This indicates that he's just not communicating clearly.

Einstein didn't "debunk" Newton; he showed that Newtonian physics were limited, and he went beyond those limitations. If you're going to hurl a chest freezer over a hedgerow with a trebuchet, Sir Isaac Newton is your guy; but if you want to send a robot to Saturn, you'll need the help of Prof. Einstein.

Theories (that survive) tend to be refined and further developed over time; there have been some refinements to Relativity, and I'm sure we'll see more.

In the same way, evolutionary theory, though built on a foundation of Darwin's great work, keeps getting further refined based on new information and more sophisticated models.

So, Scott Adams needs to learn to not say "debunk", which is a loaded word, when he means "refined" or "put in a larger context"; then he won't have people thinking he's a Creationist.

Scott Adams: Dilbert creator, entrepreneur, troll

Your thoughts are not real...

The Scavengers

Empirical Storm Trooper

Your thoughts are not real...

Sophipygian

a demon for tea

delicate #!&@*#! flower

New Member

THE BLUEBERRY QUEEN OF HADES (he/him)

Your thoughts are not real...

Your thoughts are not real...

It's a doggy dog world

It's a doggy dog world

Your thoughts are not real...

Slave to the Wordcount

Your Genial Uncle