One of several cantankerous commenters on the inexplicably contentious Julian Batts post wrote, in the course of his generalized abuse, “Who would ever book you? LOL.” (Those familiar with this forum know it was the “LOL” that got him banned more than the insult). The rhetorical question was also secretly ironic, because I was booked that very day (yesterday) on an early morning talk show, by Arthur King, an occasional commenter here who has me on South Portland, Maine’s WGAN as his guest occasionally.
You can listen to the segment here. Much thanks to Arthur, for both a professionally run interview and great timing.
Ethics Alarms 
OK, Jack, I’ll bite, as a still relative newbie here. Why is the “lol” going to get someone booted more than the actual insult? Neither is such a wonderful thing, but I would think the actual insult is more substantive.
That was a joke. I detest LOL as part of discussion comments, however, and, more seriously, mockery as a substitute for substance.
“LOL” strikes me as passive aggressive about 95% of the time; it’s a way of making mock during the discussion without having to take responsibility for mocking, because “I AM JUST JOKING!”
Ah, gotcha. That’s the problem with this online stuff when you can’t pick up on nonverbal cues. Agreed, though, mockery as a substitute for substance is what keeps comedians-turned-pundits like your old friend Bill Maher in business.
“The jealous are possessed by a mad devil and a dull spirit at the same time.”
Johann Kaspar Lavater
Now we know of TWO terms that give Jack a red rash on his cranium; LOL and Duuuude!