Not too long ago, someone posted it in a GD thread. I don't remember which one. It was from the perspective of a man (a college professor I think), as he sat in a diner describing how he uses psychology to radicalize people, and grooms them to commit acts of domestic terrorism on his behalf. No, he wasn't FBI lmao. He was in the diner to get eyes on and meet his next patsy to start the process.

Most of the passage was background details like how he's a lone actor, he's done it before, how he identifies his marks, being a teacher facilitates this, etc. This one was unwittingly provided by one of his students, and he tracked him down through social media.

Does that sound familiar to anyone? This character may not be the primary character, instead being the antagonist or other supporting character. Search here, google, and ChatGPT were inconcluisive. I even manually searched every GD thread I have opened (thanks green arrow) back to page 100. Any help is appreciated.

Your description reminds me of something Matt Bracken wrote. Lemme look.

Professor Raoul X by Matt Bracken

Holy shit that was quick. Thanks! I was hoping it was a full book, but at least I have closure lol. Thanks again.

Are you a writer?   That piece was OK, but, IMO, too boring starting out- he took too long to build up the characters and the situation. If it was a whole book ,I'd likely set it down and not finish it. Good writing grabs you by the throat on the 1st page and doesn't let go.

MUCH better, if he started out with Duncan shooting Raferty, and made it dramatic, graphic, high tension (almost misses the encounter) and bloody, and then he shoots himself dead, and then go back to the coffee shop. THEN,I want to know how he got him to do it.

BTW, I have a book published:     https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0892HY1KF?tag=arfcom00-20

I am not a writer. When I was younger, I did have somewhat of a knack for it, but I don't know if I could pull it off now. I missed a lot of potential development and experience by not pursuing it, so I think that ship has sailed. Funnily enough, a large part of my career revolved around technical writing, and sometimes it was difficult to avoid narrating and pontificating. "Just the facts, Jack", so to speak.  I wish I had kept journals of my time on active duty. As a veteran of the GWOT (OEF II and OIF II) in a combat suppport MOS that saw direct combat regularly, I think I could've written an interesting perspective, much different from the typical GWOT literature. There were some fun adventures in garrison as well. A nonfiction work or a fiction derived from my experiences could've been neat. But I digress...

As to your assessment of the story, I can see your point. I was more interested in the potential of the concept/idea, rather than the structural or technical aspects. I think that comes down to more of a style issue, but my lack of development and formal education (marketing and audience trends/appeal come to mind) informs my opinion, for whatever that's worth. I am a passive consumer, not a producer or critic, so I mostly respect the artist's decision. Sometimes I am irritated by what I think is a glaring mistake or miscue, but not normally; I'm mostly along for the ride. As a consumer, though, I do appreciate that sort of "punch in the face" introduction, which may have been better in this case.  

I appreciate your perspective, and I will check out your book.