4 ms·
That's missing the point. Sealioning doesn't mean "provide details", it's shorthand for an argumentation tactic, which enables its practitioners to argue succe
by newacct583 6y ago
That's missing the point. Sealioning doesn't mean "provide details", it's shorthand for an argumentation tactic, which enables its practitioners to argue successfully "against" a position without evidence simply by demanding evidence from someone else. Someone coming in to sealion a discussion doesn't actually want the discussion to be had on the basis of details (because if they did, they would be providing some). They want to shut the other person down without having to go through that trouble.
Essentially, sealioning (as understood in this context) in an attempt to suppress dissent. And that's bad, no matter what tactic is employed.
- vidarh 6y agoI like to see sealioning as going "why? why? why? why?" (now say that with sealion sounds). They may appear to be questions, but they're not really.
- Grinnz 6y agoI don't see this having occurred in either direction. An assertion was made, contradicting details were provided, and then it became emotional due to past interactions.
- sanderjd 6y agoSealioning is totally a thing. Another thing (which to my knowledge doesn't have a well-known name) is accusing someone of sealioning as a way to deflect from having said something that could really use to be supported, while refusing to support it. "Pi is not transcendental!" "Wow really, I'd love to see the proof of that!" "You're just sealioning!" I'm not making any claim about which of these two patterns is more common or a bigger problem, but both things totally exist.