For some reason, a great many
groups (ranging from
minorities so small they can only be called "
cliques" to the
Great Slashdot Unwashed) have a
total logical disconnect when it comes to the issue of being funny or
sharp, vs.
being taken seriously by the
mainstream. They insist on being remarkably
caustic, bordering on
offensive, in their public comments, then when the public declines to
lavish praise upon them for their
forthrightness, whine about how their
opinions matter, they
do, and they
stamp their little feet at the total idiocy of the people who just don't like to hear
straight talk.
Here's a big news flash for you. Insulting people, even when it's funny, is totally incompatible with mainstream respectability. Either quit demanding the latter, or learn to tone down or eliminate the former.
Some examples: Any time you feel tempted to use the word "sheeple" to describe the public, put the keyboard down and back slowly away from the computer with your hands on your head! When describing people who disagree with you, the words "fascist", "Nazi", "pig", or anything of similar ilk, must be avoided. Yes, I know you think the RIAA are a bunch of fascist Nazi pigs. For that matter my opinion of them leans strongly in that direction too. But if you can't find some less inflammatory way to express that opinion, you're asking to be marginalized and have only yourself to blame when that's exactly what happens.
In a nutshell, if your argument has lots of loaded words, it's either dependent on them, or they're superfluous. In the former case, you need to go back to the drawing board until you come up with a better argument. In the latter, the loaded words aren't necessary, so why are they there? Being cheeky or downright rude is no way to be admitted to the table of public opinion.