4 ms·
Why do people trawl through a poster's history in attempt to disarm their argument? Surely just addressing it on its own merit is sufficient, no?
by DetectDefect 9mo ago
Why do people trawl through a poster's history in attempt to disarm their argument? Surely just addressing it on its own merit is sufficient, no?
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- ryandrake 9mo agoNot when the account’s entire purpose is to political troll or glaze a particular Internet celebrity. That kind of bad faith belongs on Reddit.
- DetectDefect 9mo agoSchrödinger's comment: you wouldn't know an account's purpose if you did not first trawl its history.
- kimixa 9mo agoLet be honest, you'd only bother trawling if you already had significant suspicion.
- DetectDefect 9mo agoThis suspicion is likely an unconscious bias.
- exe34 9mo agoIf somebody pisses on your shoe every day, do you just try to reason with them from scratch on the 10th day? Would you introduce yourself first, and inquire as to the reason why they are assuming the position? I don't understand this perception that it is sacrilegious to look at somebody's posting history to discern any patterns in their behaviour.
- DetectDefect 9mo agoNo one appears to be pissing on shoes, but a public urination analogy may be fitting here. Should the alleged offender be reprimanded for their obvious behavior, or have their past bladder expressions deeply scrutinized first?
- exe34 9mo agoHave you actually read the account history? Elon himself would be proud.
- AlecSchueler 9mo agoBecause we live in a world where people are paid to spread FUD and disinformation especially related to political topics. Meanwhile one only has so much time to address arbitrary arguments. If it looks like the argument is being made for disingenuous purposes then engaging with it is probably a waste of your time.