While I haunt Gawker mainpage comments chiefly for the eye-roll value, I have noticed some commenter names that I thought had done epic flounces in days of yore. Can't recall whether it was MBC or McCainsSmirk but one of them did the, 'If you dare implement this iteration of kinja, my celestial comments will never again bless your dark, aggregated doorways.' Yet, pretty sure I saw him again fairly recently.

CLT has had our own share of flouncers who have returned, whether they be Eleanor Roosevelt scholars, celebrity rape apologists, or open-letter-penning grudge-holders. It makes me wonder, does anyone ever really get away from Gawker? Or are we damned to some kind of meta news purgatory, forever weathering pointless technical upgrades (Next up: "Climb the conversation tree!")? I think perhaps so.

In chaos theory, there is this thing called entropy, which is a measure of disorder, and can be expressed as a system's inevitable slide into disarray. That pretty much describes Gawker policies as they pertain to its readership. I'm calling this phenomenon Dentropy: the inability for anyone to escape the lure of this snarky news and gossip site-cum-commenting nightmare.

I do love a good flounce, though. Especially when someone takes the time to pen a weighty missive that somehow injects, 'I don't know why any of you care about this stupidity, as I haven't given it or this 800-word mess any thought whatsoever.' I wish there was a sub blog for flounces. Anyway, I'll be somewhat quieter over the next month because I have to do some actual work. I'll be reading lots on my phone and commenting occasionally if I figure out how to use it. See you soon, CLT.