this post was submitted on 17 May 2025
253 points (97.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

40742 readers
806 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I am aware of

  • Sea-lioning
  • Gaslighting
  • Gish-Galloping
  • Dogpiling

I want to know I theres any others I'm not aware of

(page 4) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] optimistic@lemm.ee 6 points 1 day ago

It's bad food. I get into bad hungry defensive moods with bad food.

[–] ConstantPain@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Someone started talking about my hair in the profile picture on a discussion on another site because they didn't agree with what I said.

When people do shit like this I just disengage. Life is too short to waste with bad faith arguments.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] theparadox@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago (1 children)

There is a series "The Alt Right Playbook" that covers a lot of bad faith and manipulative tactics, many of which are used online.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (10 children)

I hate the one where you call them a fascist (because they literally are) and then they come around and call you a "blue MAGA".

like bitch, if I was "blue MAGA" I'd be making IEDs and forcing abortions on women and shit. ain't nobody got time for that. I'm building a garden so I can fuckin eat this year.

[–] theparadox@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Calling someone "blue MAGA" is the equivalent of saying "no you!"

However, it's time to stop pretending like some small group of "MAGA" conservatives have hijacked the party and taken things too far. The monied interests backing Trump are the same as have been backing Republicans for decades. The Federalist Society, the Heritage Foundation, etc. Mitch McConnell has been working to fill the federal courts with Federalist picks for a long time. Picking or just outright manufacturing court cases that would set new precedents. Hell, even those thinktanks are just recent iterations of the same interest's attempts to shape the government as they see fit. Trump is just a nepo baby turned grifter who got lucky because his grift was actually effective at attracting and controlling the loudest segment of the Republican base.

Trump just transparently said "As long as I get filthy rich, get to be king, and you keep [metaphorically] sucking my dick, I'll keep my followers in line and use my position to put your people in power so they can implement your 'Project 25' or whatever." Republicans mostly objected to him because he lacked subtlety and was transparently greedy and petty. He ignored the game of slow, subtle changes and manipulation through "decorum" that Republicans had become experts in. Unfortunately for us, that worked wonders on a subset of the population

The people who helped those Republican politicians keep getting elected and basically wrote their proposed laws noticed Trump was popular. When it became apparent that Trump's followers were loyal, the money jumped at the chance to fast track their vision and backed him completely. They helped tweak and hone Trump's message to amplify his grifter magic. That plus some changes to election laws around the country, gerrymandering, and likely other more covert, extralegal vote manipulation got him back in power.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Anyone who unironically says "blue MAGA" immediately gives themselves away as someone to not take seriously.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] neidu3@sh.itjust.works 61 points 2 days ago (3 children)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Krudler@lemmy.world 41 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Cherry picking is probably one of the most egregious

You can make a university-level essay on a subject, and people will identify one tiny irrelevant detail they disagree with and ignore the overall point

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago

Strawmanning because they won't or can't understand your argument, mistaking the map for the place usually because of equivocating on vaguely understood or multiple definitions, non-sequetor this is where someone just yaps for awhile based on the crap that falls out of their head based on the words they heard but didn't get the point and is barely tracking

[–] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 54 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Here is a great piece someone put together a while ago which goes through many of the techniques bad actors use.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Opinionhaver@feddit.uk 33 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

False dichotomy - Assuming that because someone doesn’t agree with one viewpoint, they must fully support the opposite. Framing the issue as if there are only two mutually exclusive positions, when in fact there may be many shades in between.
Strawmanning - Misrepresenting someone’s argument - usually by exaggerating, distorting, or taking it out of context - so it’s easier to attack or refute.
Ad hominem - Attacking the character, motives, or other traits of the person making the argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself.
Reductionism - The tendency to reduce every complex issue to a single cause - like blaming everything on capitalism, fascism, patriarchy, etc. - while ignoring other contributing factors.
Moving the goalposts - Changing the criteria of an argument or shifting its focus once the original point has been addressed or challenged - usually to avoid conceding.
Hasty generalizations - Treating entire groups as if they’re uniform, attributing a trait or behavior of some individuals to all members of that group.
Oversimplification - Ignoring the nuance and complexity inherent in most issues, reducing them to overly simple terms or black-and-white thinking.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

Nice try, Elon

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›