For me, this makes it farce. Partly because the guy continues to do it after learning it bugs everyone else, and partly because of the earnestness around what fonts someone uses in office emails.
My guess is that you were driven to that level of earnestness. What was it like to have a disagreement with this guy about something that mattered (more)?
The best short descriptive word I can come up with is "absurd".
It was clearly part of a carefully crafted social image he was trying to portray. It included signing emails with "wise sayings", fortunes, and platitudes like "let your inner light shine the way for others" and other nonsense, long rambling speeches about how we're all each other's brother, and a bizarre need to try to protect the worst performing employees from even minimal levels of accountability.
In practice he was pure chaos to work with and never contributed anything meaningful to our work despite having a great looking resume (including stints at some FAANGs and top schools). When cornered about actual technical work he was supposed to be doing he just became annoyingly evasive and tried to redirect the conversation into some kind of drum-circle feelings session.
It was like a cheap con-artist, a yoga class, and a fortune cookie had a baby.
For me, this makes it farce. Partly because the guy continues to do it after learning it bugs everyone else, and partly because of the earnestness around what fonts someone uses in office emails.
My guess is that you were driven to that level of earnestness. What was it like to have a disagreement with this guy about something that mattered (more)?