636
ruleject ☝️🤓, embrace :p
(lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 May 2026
636 points (100.0% liked)
196
6251 readers
2275 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
IMO the most important part of learning fallacies is not to call them by name while debating. It's to smell the bullshit from a distance. Both in the others' reasoning and your own.
That's what those Reddit kids are missing. This shit is not an "I won!" card. It's a reasoning framework.
(Sometimes I do still call them out by name. But that's usually a sign I'm already losing my patience with the muppet in question, and considering to block them [online] / turn 180° [offline] while saying "I'm not wasting my time further with you and your dumb shit".
I don't debate religion any more, though; unlike in my later teens + early twenties. Zealots get mentally tagged "irrational harmful avoid", and the sort of person who believes with the brain but not the liver isn't usually a problem.)
My personal preference is to always respond first in good faith, even if the shit clearly stinks. Sometimes they just worded things poorly or misunderstood something. However, if their stench becomes apparent, it's then much easier to humiliate them and dip by the second response.
Yes, I understand that you have a very compelling argument, but have you considered the fact that I banged your dad ?
yes, but I banged both your parents and every one of your friends, so I can't complain
I feel like, if anyone calls out a fallacy and acts like it's an "I won" card, you should just pull out the Fallacy Fallacy and uno reverse that shit. Then fuck their dad as a victory lap.
To go a step further, arguments are healthier if they're pictured as a way to field test your beliefs to see if they hold up to scrutiny.
If you go into an argument trying to get the other person to change their mind, you'll often be met with failure even if your points were valid simply because people hate changing their mind, and you don't want to be tempted to use bad-faith arguments of your own just to secure that "win."
Instead, just give your argument; if the other person has a good point, see if yours can hold up to it, and change your outlook if you find that it can't. And if it feels like the other person is just saying whatever they think will "win," leave, because their argument wouldn't make a good field test anyway.
And if you did change their mind, they probably aren't going to tell you. Or maybe you planted a seed in their mind that helps to change it years and years down the road. You don't know! That's the crazy thing. But people just get frustrated and give up because they had an unreasonable expectation about the argument in the first place.
In a similar vein, I also try to see it as an opportunity to make my conversation partner smarter (if I happen to be right, of course).
For "winning", it's enough to prove that what they're saying is wrong. But for making them smarter, you need to point out what's correct and why that makes sense.
Well, and in general, it's a whole different way of formulating, i.e. less hostile, more helpful.
In the vast majority of cases, that makes all the difference for actually convincing them.
And it certainly hones your own mind much better, too, when you actually give the explanation rather than just pointing out fallacies.
i call out specific logical fallacies when my dad is going off on some bullshit and i want him to set aside his gen x jaded cynicism and actually listen to what I have to say. usually works pretty well but thats because he has critical thinking skills, which one would expect to be a prerequisite for a debate or even a stimulating dicussion but oh well.
Calling out fallacies isn't done for the benefit of the muppet. It's done for the benefit of onlookers who might otherwise fall for the muppet's bullshit.
Problem is that simply calling out the fallacies won't convince most onlookers. They don't get convinced by reason, but by emotive appeal. Doing it like in the OP, and saying "I banged your dad", is often more effective.
I tend to call them as a second-to-last resource mostly as a final warning. "Stop saying dumb shit if you feel entitled to my attention".
Meaning that they’re less likely to spit bile in their defense of religion, or is this a reference to some religious belief?
It's the liver as the source of willpower, like the ancients believed. Roughly: "they claim to believe in it, they find rational excuses to believe in it, but they never act on their belief, and it makes no practical difference to their daily lives. This sort of religious person is not really a problem; they won't try to convert you, they won't bug you for not following their [IMO outdated] morals, etc.
I think I got this from Huxley? Frankly I was half-asleep when I wrote the comment you're replying to.