Concern trolls be like

submitted by AntiLowEffortHuman from i.imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Did you miss the part where I pointed out this is fundamentally an appeal to motive fallacy? You are not a mind reader. Asserting this is fundamentally a diverting fallacy to subvert an argument or criticism instead of address it. You do not know my motives, or goals, nor can you lay claim to "goals" of a "group" as vague as a web forum. Goals, actions, and opinions, are more relevant to political action or activist organizations.

Point is, claiming "concern trolling" is exactly that kind of noise and diversion you alleged my criticizing your assertion of it was. The fucking irony.

[–]AntiLowEffortHuman[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Well my man, I think what you're trying to say is that I'm dismissing criticism by calling it concern trolling. Really, unless we have rock solid proof of them being/not being bad faith users I really cannot say anything about this. Either way, my point is that no one can say 'i don't like this opinion, hes an idiot' and expect to be taken seriously on a free speech website.

nor can you lay claim to "goals" of a "group" as vague as a web forum

sorry man, but I can.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Really, unless we have rock solid proof of them being/not being bad faith users I really cannot say anything about this.

Then you fundamentally cannot claim someone is concern trolling. It is, by definition, an appeal to motive. You are, if you claim concern trolling, claiming someone is being disingenuous to disorganize a group.

[–]AntiLowEffortHuman[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

It sure can be used to dodge any genuine criticism, but doesn't mean that it is always used as such.

Also, remind me next time to not put anything in the title, just "." so I can hear insults about my username only and not about my ignorance about terminology lmao

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

...? Any time you respond to an argument with an appeal to motive, instead of addressing the argument, it's a fallacy and a dismissal or diversion from its substance.

[–]AntiLowEffortHuman[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

So what you're saying is real concern trolls never exist? What if I call it concern trollling AND address the argument?

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If you address somebody's argument you can do whatever you want with the rest. That's something people usually do not understand about fallacies, they exist in lieu of argument only. If I address your argument, and then call you a dumb fuck, it is not an "ad hominem". Nevertheless on this website that would be in violation of the website guideline against dragging down discussion.

[–]AntiLowEffortHuman[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Due to the nature of saidit you can't downvote so you have to 'verbal downvote' which is just... addressing arguments at hand.

I still think that concern trolls are real and do try to derail discussion. Solution is If they gain enough traction just refute their argument so that anyone reading will not fall for them.