I know this is obviously biased as well, but in my Twitter feed, on my Facebook, 90 percent are gushing, glowing, "Thank you for doing that" - type of reviews. "It's ballsy, it's honest, it's hilarious" - that kind of stuff. Obviously those are fans.

I don't think of my opponents in the sense that I don't think of them consciously, I don't steer it one way or the other.

Back when the Bible was written, then edited, then rewritten, then rewritten, then re-edited, then translated from dead languages, then re-translated, then edited, then rewritten, then given to kings for them to take their favorite parts, then rewritten, then re-rewritten, then translated again, then given to the pope for him to approve, then rewritten, then edited again, the re-re-re-re-rewritten again...all based on stories that were told orally 30 to 90 years AFTER they happened.. to people who didnt know how to write... so...

And it's one more shitty thing to write about somebody, in between getting really, really, really upset at female Ghostbusters and Gamergate, and the things that really matter.

I was heavily influenced by Andy Kaufman and Steven Wright.

I think for a lot of people, it's just where their saturation point was. Once you get into the [Donald] Trump stuff and the Republican stuff and the Ayn Rand followers, it doesn't let up for about half an hour. It gets hard and stays hard for a while.

That's what social media is, that's what Twitter is, that's what Facebook posts are. It's just really anti-intellectual.