like either a dumbass posting stupid shit, unfair bans, idiotic arguments, etc etc. i feel so incredibly stupid letting it affect me at all, but then also there’s real feelings mixed in there because it’s a real argument i give a shit about to some degree. so it’s this odd double crossing where i know it’s stupid but i process it as being real.
bonus points for not answering ‘go outside drink water read a book’ etc etc
I’ve learned to walk away. I used to bite, hard. But now I might give them the accurate answer then leave their tirade and maybe even block them. I have this lovely wife. Great kids. I’d rather put down phone and see what they’re up to than engage with some guy online who probably doesn’t even whipe their own arse.
Great mindset
Something that really helped me on this front (that’s carried over to the way Lemmy is built, too) is that nested comments get less and less visible. At some point, it really is just you and the other person arguing and no one else is even watching. When I ask myself the question “is this really someone I want a one-on-one conversation with?” the answer is almost always no.
It’s really limited my back-and-forth to one, maybe two responses from me per exchange (bad or good). It clearly defines an endpoint to the conversation, and if there’s something I really feel like I have to say, it’s gotta be in that first or second reply. That habit has helped me so much.
I’ll have you know I do wipe my own arse
It doesn’t happen often, but I do this for people in my life occasionally as well with online. I type out a whole response that I would want to say. Then I delete it without sharing it. It is often enough for me to realize it just doesn’t matter and it is better to move on.
Reddit taught me this. It’s great to cope with frustration while not engaging in a sterile argument.
It’s a good idea. You get to rehearse your response to something touchy that somebody might mention IRL at a dinner or campfire or whatever. It helps you evaluate your own understanding before saying something ignorant or too extreme that winds up negatively affecting a good friendship.
When I first started participating online I made the mistake of regurgitating IRL a lot of opinions and garbage I read in spaces I thought I agreed with, at least adjacently. When I noticed other people doing this in my cohort I got a serious case of the cringe and made an effort to be a little more real to myself.
Now various channels are other worlds to practice my thoughts before expressing them materially, before possibly causing discomfort to people I like. I’m thankful for online spaces taking the burrs off or otherwise letting the dough proof
This, along with keeping in perspective that troll farms exist and operate on social media because more interactions mean more usage, and more usage means more value to the platform because these numbers prove people are using it. So the trolls causing friction make the platform owners richer, the trolls try to go viral on bad takes (for clout or other direct financial gain by ‘influencing’), and this is how and why there seems to be so many people seeming to be ‘extreme’ (while some certainly are, others are emboldened and just follow their lead when it seems that there’s no negative consequence). End of the day, if someone’s trying to get your goat, don’t let them buy it with bullshit.
Is there an expose I can read about farms that are intended to boost platform profits?
I’m not necessarily saying that all of the farms are owned/run by the respective social media platforms, though here is an article that touches a bit of what I’m trying to say. Another instance that I can think of was [reddit tried an astroturf campaign to try and make folks less critical of the API changes reddit tried an astroturf campaign to try and make folks less critical about the API changes
Thanks
if you are distressed by anything external, the pain is not due to the thing itself, but to your estimate of it, and this you have the power to revoke at any moment.
- Marcus Aurelius
:]
An interesting thing about Lemmy is that if you delete your comment, it also nukes every comment underneath it. So if you say something, and then people are giving you a hard time about it, and then you go out for a walk and are still annoyed about it, you can self-destruct and take them with you (this isn’t based on a true story of course, but if it was, I’d say it’s terrible in that it discourages engagement and deletes someone else’s actually-correct info, but it’s a good way to get over it all)
except you can reply to the so called nuked comment and it re appears
Sorry for the Reddit link but lemmy.world’s not letting upload images and I’m on mobile so don’t want to transcribe this, but just imagine the person you’re arguing with is like this:
Transcription of the image in @BitSound’s comment:
A Reddit comment by user “YARGLE_IS_MY_DAD”:
"I remember I got into an argument on reddit awhile ago with a person over Italian food. It got to the point they were following me into other subs to harass me.
I clicked on their profile to block them and their most recent post was them drinking their own piss on r/piss. At that moment I realized I had spent so much pointless time arguing about the taste of food with someone who drinks their own piss as a hobby. This site is a shit hole."
Thank you 🙇
This is actually also prevalent here on lemmy, gosh, the gate keepers here are insane, it borders mental illness.
Sometimes I just block without engaging.
I think that, in the moment, online arguments can feel extremely real and heated. But, then you go out and do other things, and it becomes less and less important over time.
Of course, then you come back and find a notification from one of those morons you’ve been arguing with, and then you’re right back in it. So I guess just practice? Like, just keep reminding yourself that it doesn’t actually matter, even if it feels like it does.
Also, shrooms help. I remember I got into a heated snit with some idiot online an hour or so before eating a bunch of caps. Then, when I was trying to explain what the argument was about to one of my friends, I couldn’t finish because hearing myself explain it became apparent just how ridiculous the entire thing was. I think psychedelics just give you perspective that you’re lacking in your normal day-to-day life.
I write a long comment and then don’t send it.
Usually after typing everything out and reading it back, I have cooled enough to think it’s mediocre at best and the other person doesn’t deserve so much of my time wasted anyway (which already happened of course, but they don’t need to know that 😅).
Yep, this works for me too.
As you said, taking the time to write down your thoughts, read them back, proofread, etc, gives you time to cool off. When you’re calmer, you’re better able to engage your critical thinking skills, and that’s usually when you realise the person isn’t worth it or they may have a legitimate reason for thinking differently than you.
Sometimes I react adversely, but intentionally so, when I feel a point needs to be made. I had one person take it badly that I use dark mode and a particular screenshot I posted wasn’t suitable for people with vision impairment. I took that opportunity to point out that, rather than playing the victim, they could just ask nicely. On the internet, just about all disabilities are invisible.
I don’t really engage with anything I don’t see as a thoughtful reply made in good faith. Sometimes. But I try not to.
Similarly, have they offered something worthy of my time and consideration?
Yes, consider engaging.
No? Next.
I like to lead such people on in bad faith. watching them go from thinking they are the ones in control of the conversation to realising they are being played is actually quite fun. Bonus points for the rabid PMs they might start sending towards the end. Just knowing you can rile someone up so much when they expected to control the narrative is great
I got old
Same. The opinions of other do not matter. At all. I have a nice beer that I can drink instead.
- Put down the fucking phone.
- Lit a joint.
- ???
- Profit
That only works until the joints start making you paranoid.
Lmao that almost never happens, and if it does, you kinda know it’s the herb acting up. Nothing to worry about. Absolutely nothing. No one is gonna die.
How do I handle it? Poorly.
How should I handle it? Well, a few things:
If I haven’t engaged yet, I should try to keep in mind whether it’s worth my time to engage, whether I’m really qualified to represent the opposing viewpoint, etc. Often, I’m just not the right person or it’s not the right time.
If I feel like I need to change this person’s opinion in order to be okay, it’s less about them and more about me. I probably feel like there’s some part of my humanity that isn’t being recognized here. The thing is: Responding to them by being hostile to their perspective is gonna make them feel exactly the same way, and neither of us are gonna get what we want.
It’s much better to ask: “I’m curious why you see it that way. I see it differently, and here’s why” focusing way more on what I’m subjectively bringing to table rather than what makes it an objectively better argument. Curiosity also invites them into a collaborative exercise instead of a zero-sum duel. It’s crazy that we view online debates as like… if I learned something in the process, I’m the loser! What a weird way to look at it! If I phrase it in a way where we can both feel good about changing our minds just a little bit, we’ll both feel way better.
It’s also helpful to recognize the difference between positions and interests/motivations. Two people might both want an orange, but there’s only one orange. Alice’s position is “I want that orange”. But their interest might be that they want to make orange juice with it. And Bob’s interest might be that he wants to zest the peel to make an orange cake. They could easily both be happy here, but not realize it because they’re stuck fighting on what to do instead of why they want to do that. Even if I don’t get the discussion to that point, it can be helpful to assume that the other party has reasons for their position that are different from the reasons for mine, and they might both be valid.
And along those lines… just because I’m right doesn’t mean the other person is wrong. Sometimes more than one thing can be true. The world is messy, the truth resists simplicity, and plenty of things – and people – are contradictory while still being valuable.
Finally: I should try to recognize when someone is simply acting in bad faith and cut my losses way before getting emotionally invested. Sometimes online content is literally a trap, and I don’t have to keep walking towards it after already realizing it’s a trap just because I’m curious what kind of trap it is. Innuendo Studios’ series on “The Alt-Right Playbook” is a great guide to recognizing this behavior: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Nowadays I leave. I’ll argue a little but there’s a point where you know neither of you are going to change your mind and you’re both just angry.
Taking a walk doesn’t help as I just stew, so I need to actually go do something to distract myself.
By not getting upset about something online. Here’s a person, you have not seen, behind a computer screen, most likely on another continent which you have no idea where. Who gives a fuck what they think or say, let them go.
Ask yourself this. Will this matter to me a week from now? If not then walk away and move on.
Write a reply, and then, after about 5 sentences I hit cancel.
"bonus points for not answering ‘go outside drink water read a book’ etc etc’
Erm, well, the very first thing I suggest is going outside for a bit. A walk can do wonders.
But this is one part of a general strategy, really - when you are upset by something online, make a little space between yourself and the conversation, reflect on why it upsets you, and decide if it’s worth continuing to engage.
If it is, try to be as even-handed in your responses as possible. I find deliberately trying to tone down my own rhetoric makes me feel better - if I’m using super emotional language, all I’m doing is ratcheting up my own pissed-off-o-meter. I have a better experience trying to discuss something in good faith with a fellow human, even if they’re wrong or just being an asshole for the sake of it. Try to make a space for the other human to have a real discussion. Either it will become a good conversation, and might expose you or the other person to viewpoints you haven’t considered, or it will become clear that it’s not worth your time to continue.
If it’s not worth your time (either upon initial reflection or upon fresh evidence), just stop. Nothing good will come of continuing to go at it. Look at or do stuff that carries value for yourself instead.
