badposting is a comm where you post badly
This is not a !the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net alternative. This is not a !memes@hexbear.net alternative. This is a place for you to post your bad posts.
Ever had a really shitty bit idea? Joke you want to take way past the point of where it was funny? Want to feel like a stand-up comedy guy who's been bombing a set for the past 30 minutes straight and at this point is just saying shit to see if people react to it? Really bad pun? A homemade cringe concoction? A cognitohazard that you have birthed into this world and have an urge to spread like chain mail?
Code of Conduct applies just as much here as it does everywhere else. Technically, CoC violations are bad posts. On the other hand: L + ratio + get ~~better~~ worse material bozo
in responce, one user wrote
whataboutism
the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counter-accusation or raising a different issue.
and someone else replied
Nevercomparism
The technique or practice of responding to any comparison to a point someone made with whataboutism, even when it doesn't fit because it wasn't a counter-argument and was about the same issue.
just uh... just watching new fallacies evolving in a petri-dish i guess
What else can you do when someone calls something whataboutism but respond with some equally trite nonsense
whataboutism 
Sweet fucking refried beans I can't stand 
anymore. I was on there a little while ago reading a comment thread and the whole conversation just devolved into people calling each other bots. No opinions, no facts, nothing. Just "You're a bot!" "NO U!" Fuck sake.
So while they just jabber back and forth, we sneak in and wreck up the place
I really hate when people just throw out the names of various fallacies. At least in this example they gave a definition, but they are rarely used correctly, and the smug gits who argue like this will never ever give a clear explanation of how the fallacy is supposed to apply.
It seems to me like it's basically always less confusing and more respectful to just explain in layman's terms what's wrong with an argument and/or give an analogous argument with the same problem.
I'm not saying nobody should care about knowing and understanding common fallacies, but in practice they're always used as blunt force weapons to "win" arguments with by being a fallacy master wielder. The worst offenders are usually the ones that tend to be more about rhetoric than the actual point being made, like "ad hominem", "poisoning the well" and "appeal to emotion".