Thursday, July 1, 2010

Lance Armstrong blocked me on twitter

Lance Armstrong has 2,537,691 followers on twitter. He used to have 2,537,692 until he blocked me. That’s right, of those 2,537,692 people, he singled me out, blocked me, thus preventing me from following his announcements to the world each time he eats, sleeps, changes what’s on his playlist, pees, or pees in a cup for the doping controls.

I’m sure you’re wondering how this came to be. First some background: I don’t like Lance Armstrong. I know, shocking, right? You may think I don’t like him because I think he’s a doper*. If you thought that was the reason, you would be wrong. Doping has little to do with it. I don’t like him because he’s a jerk. I won’t go into them, but I have my reasons.

*If you’re head is still buried in the sand about him doping, especially in light of the Landis allegations detailing how they would microdose with EPO during the Tour in order to maintain hematocrit and reticulocyte levels within acceptable parameters, you’re fooling yourself. Hematocrit should not rise as a result of doing a three week stage race, but that’s exactly what Lance’s did during last year’s tour, according to information he posted on his own website.

Microsoft Word - Lance Armstrong – Test Results August 09.docx

But I’m not the only person who thinks LA is a jerk. I’m not the only one who regularly suggests he’s on the sauce. So why single me out? Well apparently his fragile little ego can’t handle heckling. And when he would post particularly ridiculous tweets, I would respond in the same manner Pat or Dug or any number of you would hopefully respond to me in the comments if I said something stupid on this blog: I would make fun of him. And apparently his skin is quite thin, because it only took a handful of comments.

It began sincerely enough when LA announced to the world that he had given a Trek Madone to French President Nikolas Sarkozy, and that this was somehow going to help cure cancer. So I responded:

@lancearmstrong Wouldn't it have been more effective to donate the cost of the madone to @PowerOfBicycles? Like Sarkozy needs a Madone.

Then, instead of, I don’t know, using Google or Wikipedia, Lance, who apparently missed that part in school, decided that the most efficient way to find out what was the first official day of summer was to ask two and a half million people all at once:

What's the first official day of summer?

To which I responded:

@lancearmstrong Did you even go to school? #lazydumbass

Then when he got his answer, even though all but probably six (five of which were in his entourage) of those two and a half million people already knew it, he decided to perform the public service of making sure they knew:

First day of summer? June 21.

To which I responded:

@lancearmstrong No shit.

Then in response to this story, according to which French anti-doping president Pierre Bordry accused UCI drug testers of favoring Astana during last year’s tour, I wrote the following:

@lancearmstrong "Bordry accused UCI drug-testers of favoring Lance Armstrong's former team Astana..." $100k? What a bargain.*

*Lance Armstrong made a “donation” to the UCI. He claims it was to support their anti-doping efforts. According to Landis, it was a payoff to get them to look the other way at a positive.

I really shouldn’t take credit for this one, because it was Rachel’s idea. But on 21 June, I posted the following:

@lancearmstrong Today is the first official day of summer. In case you forgot.

And after the astonishingly bad officiating during the group stage of the World Cup, in which two goals scored by the USA were disallowed, one for no reason at all, one for a dubious off-side call, I posted this:

Wonder how #usa #worldcup results would differ if @lancearmstrong made a donation to fifa?

It finally all came to a head after LA gushed over the beautiful scenery during his training rides in the Pyrenees and pointed everyone to a video of the ride:

Video from yesterday's recon up the Port de Bales. Beautiful up there. http://bit.ly/aMB3iG

I watched the video. All it showed was LA, as seen from the window of the team car, with a couple minutes of Johan driving the team car. So I responded:

@lancearmstrong It may indeed be beautiful there, but all the video showed was your ugly mug with a cameo of Johan. Not so much beautiful.

Then earlier this week, I read on Velonews that LA had announced via Twitter that this would be his last time racing Le Tour. And I thought “wait a minute—I didn’t see that on Twitter.” And then I thought “come to think of it, I haven’t seen LA announce what he’s eating for breakfast, that he’s sitting in an airport terminal, that his phone just rang, or any other exciting and noteworthy events that two and a half million people are just dying to know about. Why? The guy’s as regular as three bowls of bran flakes when it comes to announcing the mundane, but I’ve seen none of it.”

So I clicked over to twitter, and I looked at who I’m following, and I didn’t see LA’s name. And I thought “this is weird, I’ve thought about un-following LA because anything worth knowing from twitter gets reported by the regular press anyway, but I wasn’t quite ready to stop heckling him for the more ridiculous selections from his constant drivel. I don’t remember un-following him, but he isn’t there.”

Out of curiosity, I navigated to his page and clicked the follow button. And this is what I got:

Blocked

“This user has blocked you from following them*.”

*I hate the use of them as a singular pronoun. Twitter does it. Facebook does it. Seriously, how hard is it to include gender as part of someone’s profile and add logic to your software** to generate the appropriate gender-specific pronoun rather than taking this lazy and incorrect approach. “He or she” and “him or her,” though clunky, are both better alternatives than they or them when referring to the singular***.

**I’m in the software business, so I know the answer is: not that hard at all. Unless you’re lazy. Or simply unperturbed by mismatched diction. I think of these people as the kind who don’t wear underwear because they don’t want to have to wash it.

***Of course in LA’s case, since he has an entourage, the plural may in fact be correct.

So evidently seven is not only the number of times LA has won Le Tour, but it’s also the number of sarcastic comments he can tolerate on twitter before his armadillo-like skin is penetrated and he has to single out, from the two and a half million followers, one sarcastic and annoying critic in a sea of sycophants.

LA claimed in his first book that if it came down to a contest of who could suffer the longest, he knew he could always win. Well he and I were having a contest of sorts to see who could suffer the longest—could I suffer his incessant tweeting of non-events longer than he could suffer my sarcastic responses? Guess we know who won that one.

And for the record, my snarkiness is 100% clean. I got this way through years of cynicism and did not artificially enhance my annoyingness in any way. I am the most tested smartass in the world, and I have never tested positive for a banned substance. Now what color jersey do I get? And which beer—it better be a particularly bitter one—wants to sign me up as its spokesman?

12 comments:

  1. I'm surprised he waited as long as he did to block you now that I've read what you sent!

    I'm not on Twitter, but the way I understand it is that people voluntarily follow each other's tweets. Since you made the decision to follow him, I don't see why he should feel obligated to receive your smart ass replies (even though some of them were quite witty and funny). The fact he endured as long as he did tells me he's in good form and ready for a final successful Tour!

    PS - I realize this is a different post, but I read your blog for stuff like this. Who else has content detailing how he heckled Lance? You have the largest cojones of any blogger I know.

    ReplyDelete
  2. that is awesome...what f*$%stick! I can't stand him...can he just go away now?

    -Lozy

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm not a Lance lover or a hater, so I feel somewhat impartial in saying that most would consider your tweets as "trolling". Even so, you should block him back.

    ReplyDelete
  4. 331: I was totally being a troll. But why would I block him back? I don't block anyone from reading or commenting on this blog, why would I block someone from twitter? You put something in the public domain, you own it. HTFU and deal with the fallout.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hmmm, so you don't like Lance because he is a jerk (aka asshole). So I guess it is probably alright for him not liking (or more accurately blocking) you for the same reason. :)

    I would guess that Lance (or his entourage) blocks hundreds of people a day. I am surprised he has time to train.

    ReplyDelete
  6. You got blocked by Laance? You must be doing something right! I don't like him either. I have that right, don't I? Sometimes I block Lance's brownshirt followers from Facebook. I get tired of them flaming anyone who isn't a fellow Lancenazi.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Many languages have a gender-neutral, third-person singular possessive pronoun. English does, too--their. Just because style experts don't accept it as correct doesn't mean it isn't. I'd side with the millions of native English speakers who recognize that in some contexts, "their" means "his or hers" and not "belonging to more than one person." Saying otherwise is like insisting that "ain't" ain't a word or that the English needs "whom" even though syntax alone does a fine job of distinguishing between "who" as a subject and "who" as a direct object.

    Feel free to hate "their" as a singular pronoun all you like, but please try not to interfere with the natural development of the English language.

    Just sayin'.

    ReplyDelete
  8. FG: "Feel free to hate "their" as a singular pronoun all you like, but please try not to interfere with the natural development of the English language."

    The very act of speaking and writing influences the natural development of the English language. Those with the broadest reach exert the most influence. Absent a language academy, correct usage is anything but definitive, therefore common usage becomes accepted as "correct."

    Just as you seem intent on the usage of "their" as a gender-neutral singular possessive and are free to use it as such thus casting your usage vote, I'm free to act to the contrary. Between you and me, I think I'll lose. Twitter and Facebook will prove my undoing by virtue of their massive collective reach.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Truest sign of a washed up hack pretending he's something he's not. Look how proud you are that Lance blocked you. That little yellow band on your pic is so cute. Why are Americans always masquerading around with their pathetic notion of entitlement? The guy is a jerk, so you act like a jerk, then admit you're acting like a jerk? It's a sad way to derive identity in this world: "Hey, I'm the asshole Lance blocked!" Vainly seeking approval for such stupid crap--like a 5 year old. Congrats, man. Now you have an accomplishment for your tombstone, right along with your 53 followers on Twitter. Way to go!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ralph: "The guy is a jerk, so you act like a jerk, then admit you're acting like a jerk? It's a sad way to derive identity in this world..."

    No shit. It's almost as sad and pathetic as posting anonymous, derisive comments on someone's blog. At least sack up and enable access to your profile.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Isn't 90% of this blog based on derisive comments? Didn't you just post an entire derisive post about how proud you were of your derisiveness?

    Did I mention something about hypocrisy? I can't remember...

    Sorry I don't have a complete profile online so I can seek approval and validation from the world for my life. I don't have a blog or anything. I'm a high school senior in Utah Valley who enjoys cycling and people who aren't lame. Do you want my address so you can come to my house or something?

    It kind of sucks when people call you out, doesn't it? It's kind of annoying, isn't it? Kind of like you want to block the person for wasting everyone's time who enjoys the space you've created on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
  12. BTW--not sure what "sack up" means, but you can rest assured I'm not into that, so I'm afraid I can't let you come to my house.

    ReplyDelete