It's a very well thought out article and for that reason I really, really think you should consider changing the title. You were not almost Adam Lanza because you did not almost go to an elementary school in Newtown CT and kill 20 children. You may have almost been driven to murder or violence, but that's different. I know your intention with the article was good and I did enjoy reading it, but I can't help but feel like the title is using the name of an absolute monster to drive click traffic and that does not sit well with me at all.
I've seen lots of articles that seem to have been designed to drive click traffic, but this didn't seem like one of them. The author seemed completely sincere, and if he says that under a slightly different set of circumstances he could have succumbed to his violent urges, why should we believe otherwise?
I agree the article is definitely full of great original content. I think the title was made to drive link traffic, and given the subject of the title I voiced my objection to that.
I wouldn't say it's so much as driving click traffic. It was a response to an event that happened somewhere else. I mean, he could have just renamed the article as "Response to the Sandy Hook Shooting", but it's not as close to what he actually wrote about.
Speaking for myself, I know first-hand just how powerful a force this inner rage is, that the article talks about. I grew up in a largely similar situation where I, too, was teased and bullied - to the point where I lost control and lashed out violently.
I often see in myself the capability of performing such an awful act as Adam did. Not for any particular reason, but simply because I've bottled up immense rage over the years; rage that I somehow manage to keep under tight control. A so-called "Irish temper," if you will.
Honestly, I find it surprising that things like this don't happen more often among us "nerds;" that more of us don't lash out at society.
