Once upon a website dreary, while I argued, drunk and beery
Over many a misinterpretation of domestic law
I debated, swiftly typing, suddenly I read some writing
As of some sardonic sniping, sniped at what I wrote before
"’Tis some comedian," I muttered, "jesting, not declaring war.
Only this and nothing more."

Ah, distinctly I remember his overt threat to dismember
Something which I should condemn, a threat to leave me worse than sore
"But", I thought, "he must be joking, 'tis but merely fun he's poking
Humour's shaft of wit he's cloaking, cloaked behind his threats of gore"
But I could have been mistaken, it was *so* hard to be sure.
His word choice was very poor

Interlocutor insisting that he was a devout Christian
And the world has been existing for six thousand years, no more
"..and it's flat too?" I inquired, although starting to feel tired
Weary and uninspired, far more than I was before
For 'tis truly enervating, debating with this kind of bore
Man shared Earth with dinosaur?

I was sure he must be fakin' dimwittedness, but I'm shaken
Could it be that I'm mistaken: am I wrong, if so wherefore?
Was he honest in stupidity, writing with extreme vapidity?
Should I respond with cupidity, though his posting makes me snore?
Posting that is strewn with errors, errors and typos galore
Methinks smileys are called for

Clearly now I see the schism twixt humour and extremism
Was it wit or just fascism, when he called me "Satan's whore"?
Caught was I in indecision to respond with sheer derision
At his weird dystopian vision; or mayhap to laugh - encore!
This could be at the foundation of a well-known online law:
Something Nathan Poe first saw

Nathan Poe said, rather wryly, that without a wink or smiley
One could simply and entirely misconstrue what came before.
Is a person being serious? Unsarcastic and imperious
Or satiric'ly mysterious? Goal or own-goal might they score?
Fascist or facetious? Frankly, I cannot tell any more.
Quoth the Nathan: 'tis Poe's Law