Is this person a hero, or a malicious jerk?

This story has received a high number of upvotes but the comments bounce around between calling the main protagonist a hero, to a malicious jerk whose behavior should not be celebrated.

As an editor, we try to be careful not to share stories that explicitly advocate violence or behavior that might indirectly cause harm, but we also want to call out entitled behavior and showcase the comeuppance that can result from that - whether that comeuppance is justifiable or satisfying is usually a matter of taste.

What do you think? It’s really helpful to get your feedback on things like this.

The father in law knew what was in there, and knew what would happen if he did that. Thus his actions that followed are potentially criminal, and definitely not worth celebrating.

This means that the average adult could withstand more than 1,000 stings, whereas 500 stings could kill a child. However, in a person who is allergic to such stings, one sting can cause death due to an anaphylactic reaction (a life-threatening allergic reaction in which blood pressure falls and the airway closes).

In this case, the protagonist of this story could have killed someone, and could have been charged with murder since his actions directly caused the bee attack.


He was extremely lucky his actions didn’t kill anyone. It’s one thing to follow stupid instructions in the knowledge you’re going to inconvenience the person issuing the orders, it’s another thing entirely to carry them out knowing that people are going to get seriously injured.

TV Tropes would describe this as Disproportionate Retribution.


This is absolutely NOT a story that belongs on this site. Far too many people are hero worshipping a man who deliberately hospitalized many people, could Easily have killed someone, and is smugly proud of the fact.

There was NO reason and NO justification for his actions. He knew full well his actions would result in grave harm, and that he himself would be immune to them. The ‘just following orders’ defense does not fly. Even in the military, if a soldier is given an illegal order or an order he knows will cause harm to innocents and allies, he is not only allowed to refuse it but can be prosecuted for not refusing it.

He could have easily gotten the same effect by refusing to take action. Had he pulled his machines out, told all the other workers about the danger and told them to pull out, it would have gotten the same end result, without harm.

The bosses may be a jerk, that does not give you the right to deliberately hospitalize them.

No, this person is not a hero at all, and this story should NOT be posted to hold him up as one.

Edit - That is not to mention the fact that he joyfully destroyed a large, and probably quite old hive of bees, which is extremely damaging to an ecological system.


I remember having very mixed feelings when I read that story.

The little devil in me whispers: “Mwahah, that really showed them”

And my gut, brain and the little angel screams: “Wtf, that’s way over the top! People could have gotten seriously hurt, or even died!”

I probably would have given the guy “a look” as he kept on getting interrupted, as he was trying to explain. If the guy wouldn’t catch on I’d just start the sentence with “Bees. Very mad bees”. I’m sure that’d get the guys attention


There’s a fine line for NAR to walk – stories about comeuppance are one thing, and have drawn a wonderful crowd to the comments and now the forums. Stories about grievous injury or death… I think that would get a different crowd, not as nice. This story didn’t quite go there, but we can all see just how easily it could have.

Basically, you should stay well away from the territory of the Darwin Awards. That includes being wary of stories that laud really dangerous retaliations.


Malicious jerk? How about attempted murderer. He put several people in the hospital because ONE of them was an arrogant ass. Even giving the tree one good whack to demonstrate the danger would have been unacceptable; the way he gleefully kept at it while the others screamed and ran for their lives is ghoulish.


It depends on the hierarchy in the company.
If he would have been financially destroyed by losing his job for not obeying the order, then he was stuck between a rock and a hard place. And he would be put there specifically by a dictator.

If a dictator is willing to ruin you, then they are willing to ruin others. That means you can save thousands of people from financial destruction by taking down this one hierarchical terrorist. Under certain ethical systems that warrants some risk of collateral damage (also remember that the people hurt were all in the hierarchy that is oppressing the subject, they are all equally to blame for not stopping the power abuse.)

But that doesn’t seem to apply here, because this guy has family in high places, they live consequence-free.

And as DoctorStrange said, the destruction of a large beehive is ecologically damaging.

Note to self: Oooh boy, that was a conditional statement, people never read the condition part of conditional statements. I am going to catch so much flak from people who only read the part after “then”.

I’m sorry, Regret… but your conditional is irrelevant. This isn’t a terrorist, or dictator. This is an American citizen… and under American law, They have rights. This is still assault, and if anyone had died, it’d be murder (Manslaughter?)

I’m not sure what kind of worker protections that South Carolina has, or if you can be fired for refusing to break the law. Unfortunately, this may just be one of those times where there is no escape, and you’d be better off quitting rather than risking jail time.

(TLDR This is America, not the Klingon Empire)


Law and morality are not the same thing, so I am going to do a mental find-and-replace to get back to discussing morality.

In an economy where finding a job is not easy, losing your job is both a threat to your abillity to feed yourself, to keep a roof over your head, and a threat to your social environment. You are going to lose a lot of your social interactions.

Managers are effectively dictators, since they run every little detail of your (work-) life. If they decide that you must do your job one-handed, then they can do that. If they decide your toilet breaks will get timed, then they can do that.

If you and all your colleagues have a great idea for a change? Then that change will only happen if the manager is a nice guy, in a good mood, willing to listen, and they see a way for this to make them or their managers richer. That’s no different from a dictatorship, or the leader of a street gang, if the comparison to nation-states is confusing.

Corporations are not democratic, employees are not free. The freedom to starve is no freedom at all, and the only other freedom a corporate employee has is the freedom to move, which is a massive social upheaval not only for you but also for your family. This is no different that feudal serfs.

Yes, the bee thing is violence. but it is violence not only in self-defense, but also in defense of the thousands of others this manager is going to hurt. I’m not a fan, because I think there are better ways to change destructive managers, but there are moral arguments for this, now very hypothetical, scenario.

I don’t see a difference between this situation and the other situations where we think violence is an acceptable option to handle non-violent problems (think of cops preventing a theft).

1 Like

That story didn’t annoy me as much as this one:

At least with the bee story, the vast majority of the comments were anti the FIL’s actions. In the linked story, I could not believe the number of people who didn’t think there was anything wrong in pressurising his clearly uncomfortable friend into sharing a bed with him because of a mess up by the hotel.

As I said (repeatedly) in the comments, it should not matter if the friend was gay, straight, raging homophobe, afraid of “catching the gay” or whatever: if he does not want to share a bed with you, YOU DO NOT MAKE HIM SHARE A BED WITH YOU.

…sorry. Still got some pent up anger there.


Law and morality often do align. This is assaulted and attempted murder, both in the moral and legal sense of the words.

That isn’t justification for what this a**hole did.

Under law, cops - in most countries - are only allowed to use enough force to stop the crime. If you’re stealing a hat from Target, they’re not allowed to break out the guns and shoot you.

This is not self defence. Self defence exists only to end an engagement. It does not exist to exact revenge.

To add to that, no one was in physical danger until the antagonist of this story (The father in law is an antagonist) released the bees, so self defence does not apply.

This is not the Klingon Empire. You can’t just kill your superiors because you don’t like how they act.


That story makes me angry. I absolutely agree with you, Stephen. The OP was a jerk, and I can definitely understand why the friend didn’t want to share the bed with the OP.

Personally, unless I am on cuddling terms with someone, I don’t want to share a bed with them, regardless of if they are male or female, straight or not.

While we’re on the subject of stories where the OP is an insufferable jerk, what about the Rememberance Day Statue OP? I believe that one was probably the first time I saw the entire comments section united.


I remember that story but can’t find the link for it. Pretty sure it’s in either the Designated Viloain or Designated Hero section for NAR’s pages on TV Tropes.

This one also has near complete hatred for the disruption caused by the OP:

The top comment, which talks about wanting to punch the OP, has over 300 upvotes and not one down vote!


This is the one I mentioned:

It was Armistice Day, not Rememberance day… and the OP thinks honouring fallen soldiers means freezing and never responding to any kind of stimuli.


What about the other story where OP and their Mom are travellers and they needed to go to a bank and for some reason the ENTIRE bank was silent? Something to do with I think an oil tanker? I got the details mixed up OP is the traveller, the Mom lives in Norway.

That one I feel is a bit half an half. It would have taken only 2 seconds or so for the manager to say something… or better, write something… to let people know what was happening. The OP and mother were from out of the country, so they hadn’t heard about it.

I have to ask. What should the OP have done? The hotel had no other room available. If it bothered the other guy so much, could he not have slept on the floor or in a chair? What exactly would you have done?

Just wondering, how are you able to take the text someone said so it shows that it’s from someone else and what you’re commenting on, like you did here?:slightly_smiling_face:


See this?

Hopefully this image will help:

Ignore the copy/select all/etc bar above the highlighted text, but instead look at the light grey “Quote” box just underneath.

If you highlight text on a Discord thread, that should appear (not sure if that comes with user levels though). Press it, and the quote, along with the necessary html text, will appear in the reply box at the bottom of the thread.

As I said, if it doesn’t appear for you yet, it will in time, once Discord determines you’ve been a user long enough. For whatever reason, Discord doesn’t give you all the buttons straight away