#online arguments

[todaslocas]

How to debate right wing trolls online (and win)

I've been in a few arguments online recently, and I've found these steps pretty useful in shutting people up. So, here's how you should go about debating right wing trolls online:

Step 0: If you have the means to do so, delete their comment/reply. There is no use debating them if you have control over who sees what they said. Sites like Youtube allow you to delete comments on your videos. There is no shame in doing so.

Step 0.5: If you aren’t mentally prepared to debate someone arguing in bad faith, let it be. It can be exhausting, and your mental health is worth more than some jerk online.

Step 1: Find out if they are operating on belief or emotion. Belief is inherently based in emotion, but many trolls are operating on a belief only in themselves. Like most bullies, the most common reason for this is because they are not doing well emotionally and choose to take it out on others. If the substance of their initial argument relies on personal attacks and insults, ask if they’re ok. Not only does it potentially throw them off if they were prepared for an actual argument, it extends a hand to them and offers help. It usually won’t result in anything other than them leaving the argument, but sometimes it can genuinely be a helpful moment in their struggles. However, if their initial argument relies mostly on beliefs and an “attempt” at a fact based debate, asking this question can come off as a personal attack and make you look worse in the long run, even if you explain what you were trying to do. If this is the case, move on to step 2.

Step 2: Remain calm and remember why you’re debating them. Do not get emotional, do not swear, and above all, attack their ideas, not their character. You are not trying to convince them of anything, it will not happen. You are trying to convince all the people on the fence who are reading your exchange, and shut them up as quickly as possibly. This will also come in handy later.

Step 3: Pay attention to their tactics. Innuendo Studios’ “The Alt Right Playbook” is a great way to familiarize yourself with these tactics. They are meant to steer you away from your winning argument and make you look worse. No amount of good faith arguing will make you look better after one of them has been deployed. Which is why you must…

Step 4: Attack their tactics. To most people, these tactics don’t seem very conductive to a good faith argument when they’re spelled out. Go through the flow of the conversation and explain what they’ve done to try and manipulate it in their favor. If you point out that they need to use backhanded tactics to make themselves look reasonable, all of their arguments are invalidated. To put it lightly, this does not make them look very good. If they aren’t using any of these tactics, move on to step 5.

Step 5: Attack their language. If they aren’t using any backhanded tactics, they are probably insulting you. Because you haven’t been emotional or insulted them, they know nothing about you. But you know something very important about them. They are a jerk. Use every one of their insults and personal attacks to build your case for why they’re being a jerk and a bully. Most people (especially the people you’re trying to convince) don’t respect the opinions of people like that. After steps 4 and 5, they should have no recourse other than to double down (in which case simply repeat steps 4 and 5 until they quickly get bored) or apologize and start acting like an adult.

Step 6: Congratulations. You have either got them to shut up, or you’re having an actual honest to god conversation with your opponent. If you’re in the latter camp, the good news is that the right has been encountering a problem for a long time that their opinions suck and are vastly unpopular. You have facts on your side. Good luck.

[weirdnerdstr]

Social media had made some of y'all really mean to the point you don't care about hurting someone because you believe it's okay to hurt someone who thinks differently than you

[chase-omega]

Chronically online people and sane people will react to a "bad" game or a "bad" movie in 2 very different ways.

A chronically online person will make a tediously long video essay nitpicking apart every tiny insignificant detail about their experience, even parts of the experience that weren't even real issues. They will then harshly insult people who worked on it and people who enjoy it despite it's flaws.

A sane person will just simply say "this wasn't for me", highlight a couple of the larger problems they had with the product, and move on with their lives. They won't even engage in online arguments about it, they're so confident in their opinion that they see no reason to "defend" it.

I am trying to be more like that sane person every day of my life.

I've even started taking half-hour long walks outside, in the real world, actually touching grass.

I don't wanna be like the rest of these people anymore.

I'm just so tired. I don't wanna do this anymore.

[resident-idiot-simp]

If you get into an argument online don't be a bitch about it commit, don't backtrack, and admit if/when you're wrong. If you can say you were wrong It makes you a better person there's no shame in it that's how you learn, but don't get louder out of spite because you don't want to be wrong that's not how it works.

Also don't make it personal!

-sincerely a person who's done with people's bullshit

[sordidamok]

Sometimes I find myself arguing with someone on this platform. This is always a stupid and useless thing to do, and when I realize I'm doing it, I delete everything I've said in the argument.

There is no point in arguing on the internet. I am not convinced that there is any point in arguing in real life, either. It doesn't seem to do any good.

The free exchange of differing opinions might result in people's minds being changed, but only if the people involved are willing to consider other people's perspectives. This is rarely the case. Most people who engage in arguments, online or in real life, are not trying to change anyone's mind - they're just thoughtlessly repeating bullet points without context in order to make themselves feel smart.

Arguing in general, and online in particular, is a stupid and useless thing to do. If I participate in an argument, it's because I've forgotten the fact. I'm not as good at living out my beliefs as I wish I was.

This doesn't mean that I won't fight - in some circumstances, I will.

[heejinsleftnut]

I do not engage in online arguments. I find them fruitless and unsatisfying. If you come onto my page just to start saying some dumb shit, you're getting blocked. Zero hesitation, end of discussion. Tumblr is my place to find peace, community, and memes. If you're just being an asshole for the sake of being an asshole, I don't have time for you. Bye.

[stabby-apologist]

Anytime I read arguing on the internet, I’m specifically reminded of the scene where the milita kill the guards that were surrendering in the Patriot and one of those good guys are like “YOU GUYS GO BACK TO CHURCH!” Dude who plays a scientist in the Core says ���Maybe they were [going to surrender]. We will never know.”

Extremely specific

And funny lmfao

[docexe-mx]

If you don't know or understand enough about the subject, then don't comment on the subject.

Trying to tackle every single current event and political issue that comes your way online, regardless of how educated you actually are about the subject, is often just not constructive. You are not actually “supporting the cause”, at best you’re just painting yourself as a fool and at worst you are actually making the situation even worse. Especially if you’re only commenting on the matter to score points with whatever tribe on the political spectrum you identify yourself with.

this is correct for normal people too like if you don't know about something beyond a social media infographic level please feel free to shut the hell UP lol

[hurtcomforted]

an account that rates online fights. not even their topics but like, the quality of the arguments etc.

"purposefully misunderstanding your opponent, minus five points"

"insulting their character instead of countering their arguments, minus ten"

no one is sure if there’s actually a points system or if it’s completely subjective.

people start arguing under their posts about which side the acc is on and they rate those too, without ever actually stating their opinion.

[kuiperoid]

Sometimes I see my fellow US-based leftist friends get in these political Internet arguments with people and at some point the other person will refer to them as a "liberal," to which they will respond with "well, ackshually, 'liberal' refers to the center-right ideology developed in the 1700s by Whocares Frenchman and I'm really an Anarcho-Posadist with Antarctican characteristics..." To them I say: I get it, everyone wants to be described accurately, but this argument is unnecessary, because either 1) the person you are arguing with is a normal United Statesian who lacks your neurodivergent special interest in niche political ideologies and just uses "liberal" to mean "not a right-winger," or 2) this person is a seasoned troll and is intentionally saying that because they know it will annoy you.

[bardofthefreaks]

"You’re such a brat, you don't deserve peoples kindness." i was literally standing up for myself…. with multiple people arguing at me over a rhetorical question…

[chase-omega]

The one who feels like they always gotta have the last word is usually the most foolish.

i dont even argue with people anymore. i simply explain why theyre wrong, and leave them to their little temper tantrum.

[boxheadpaint]

Man it’s fucking obnoxiously insidious how blatant this shit is. Oh suddenly we have a guide to watch out for scams, oh suddenly PayPal is discontinuing their fundraiser services, around the year mark of the 7th? Like scams havent been an issue for years already and it’s just a coincidence how targeted it all is?

And while im at it you fucking ghouls who share the chart of Uhmm Well How Is It A Genocide When There’s So Many Of Them :-) and mock peoples suffering as performative, as they ask for a chance to live and say Well English isn’t your first language so this is a scam LOL, to turn a blind eye to the HOSPITALS being put up as targets because Obviously its all hamas and misinformation- and if it isnt, its still hamas and justified. All the bodies are justified. All the people bleeding out and starving are justified. Every man, woman, and child could be a terrorist. Don’t you know?

There is nothing in the world to justify any of this. for the love of god please help who you can and keep spreading fundraisers, these are people begging for their lives. These are people begging for their lives

[soapdispensersalesman]

Interesting watch about Internet culture and the exhausting unnecessary online arguments one has on twitter, definitely made some interesting points about the toxic state of social media and things we should definitely let go of

[9ofspades]

Trying to hide how hard you’re getting shit on by insisting an ‘argument’ be moved onto YOUR playing field is like wearing a big sandwich board that says ‘I traded in my integrity for a chance to be right online, please spit on me’

…you know you can reblog a post, right? Like, move it to your own “playing field”. Or make your own post and I’ll reblog it.

I get that you’re scared to put your own username to things you say publicly, so you want to hide them in the notes or in anonymous asks, but it really isn’t fair to people who make posts for you to be starting arguments in their notes.