If I ignore/block them, it allows them to continue unchallenged. I hate getting into it with them, since they are a baseline idiot.

I guess that’s it. I saw a person with a 6 month account spouting garbage, was gonna block but thought perhaps that wasn’t morally responsible. Wondering what the options were.

  • guldukat
    link
    fedilink
    51 day ago

    Ignore them, then vote accordingly. Nothing you or I say will have any effect

  • FarraigePlaisteach
    link
    fedilink
    91 day ago

    I tend to not reply because that will just draw more attention to them. I will post a separate top level comment rebutting their statements without referring to them.

  • @r0ertel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    102 days ago

    There’s a lot of other good suggestions here, so I’ll just ask, what outcome are you hoping to achieve?

      • @r0ertel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        101 day ago

        If that’s the case, I’d recommend treating them like spam: reply and you’ll get a lot more.

        Mostly, it’s a huge emotional and time investment if you want to change someone’s behavior and from what I gather, it’s a one on one type of thing and really hard. If you want to stop them from interacting negatively with others, your best action would be to report them.

        If you’re upset and want to vent, then engaging will be fun for a while, but mostly futile in terms of behaviour adjustments.

        • @lapping6596@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          21 day ago

          If I respond, it’s mostly for the ‘audience’. I used to argue on r/libertarian or r/conservative, not to change the other person’s mind, but to add a different opinion to the thread. I doubt I ever convinced the other person of anything, but hope I got other people to think a bit more about some of the policies being advocated for.

          • @Randomgal@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            111 hours ago

            This makes it look like the post is popular and draws more attention. Depending on the platform, it signals the algorithm to show it to more people.

            Doing this is engaging exactly the way they expect you to engage, it helps no one.

  • bitofarambler
    link
    fedilink
    125
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    i find this very satisfying: gently disagreeing with them via a short single positive message like “gay people do deserve respect”, then letting them throw a very lengthy, time-invested tantrum before gently and completely disagreeing with their comment with another short sentence, over and over until they get tired.

    i find that both very funny and I’m putting out positive messages that negate their bigotry without too much time or effort.

    that’s just if you have the time and inclination to engage, you aren’t morally obligated to subject yourself to abusive behavior.

    if it’s real bad, they’re probably violating a rule, and reporting them will get them banned

      • @Seleni@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        152 days ago

        I’m going to post this idea by agent_nycto, because it’s another good way to deal with them, especially if you run into them IRL:

        I don’t think you should be quiet, it makes them feel like everyone is agreeing with them and makes everyone miserable. Time to introduce you to my favorite game to play with conservatives, Politics Judo!

        So you hear them rant about a thing. Some dumbass talking point. Let’s use gun control. It’s pretty easy to know in advance what the talking points are since they never shut up and parrot the same problem and solution over and over. “Shouldn’t take guns, it’s a mental problem not a gun problem”.

        Things are basically boiled down to a problem and a solution. A lot of people try to convince people that the problem isn’t what people think it is, and that’s hard to do. Even if they are just misinformed, it feels like trying to dismiss their fears.

        So what you do is you agree with the problem, then use lefty talking points as the solution.

        “Oh yeah, gun violence is pretty bad! And I love the Constitution, we shouldn’t mess with that!” (Use small words and also throw in some patriotism, makes them feel like you’re on their side. You want to sound like a right wing media con artist) “so instead of taking guns away, we should instead start having more, free, mental health care in this country. Since it’s a mental health problem and these people are crazy, that is the solution that makes the most sense!” (Don’t try to get them to agree to your solution, just state it as the obvious one)

        It becomes weaponized cognitive dissonance. Their brains fry because you said the things you should to agree with them, flagged yourself as an ally, but then said the thing they were told is the bad and shouldn’t want.

        If they try to argue with your solution, rinse and repeat to a different talking point. “Oh yeah it might cost more, and we shouldn’t have to pay more for it, so we should get the rich people who are screwing average hard working Americans over by not paying taxes to do that. We should shut down tax loopholes and increase funding to the IRS so they can go after them instead of the little guy”

        Always sound like you’re agreeing with them, but giving solutions that they disagree with that seem to be off topic but are related.

    • comfy
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      A good thing about this approach is you’re not wasting your time (much). It doesn’t matter if they’re trolling for attention or entertainment if you remain passive/neutral and give them so little to work with.

      Imagine instead giving them an originally-written 200 word argument and then they just reply “didnt read” - wasted your time on a bad faith prank. (that said - perhaps your audience isn’t the troll, but rather, the lurkers. I would only consider putting in effort if the comment isn’t being downvoted to the bottom holding an anchor)

  • @barneypiccolo@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    62 days ago

    Generally, my tactic is to not engage directly, but address the rest of the audience, essentially pointing at the subject and mocking him (“Can you believe this MAGA Traitor?..”). When he tries to respond, again ignore him, and just point and laugh.

    They get really frustrated being made fun of, without having the satisfaction of creating liberal outrage.

  • davel [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    403 days ago

    Did you report this person? Racists are usually quickly dispensed with, because if they’re allowed to continue unchallenged then this will become a Nazi bar.

    • comfy
      link
      fedilink
      42 days ago

      For sure, it’s great to be in communities like ours and theirs where staff actually boot them all out, and it’s also useful to know tactics for treating those people if they’re in places which idealistically believe in free speech more than saving lives and stuff. Luckily I can’t think of any active instances which don’t have basic anti-bigotry rules, but it’s entirely possible for one to federate and not earn a full-instance ban, at least from the more liberal instances. I don’t think it’s enough to say ‘skill issue don’t use a bad instance’, for example Wolfballs remained in the scene for a while until they were finally considered too rabid for most instances to tolerate.

  • @TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    343 days ago

    You’re not gonna change their mind.

    You’d be better spending your time breaking a brick wall with your skull.

    Fuck em. Block em.

    • Sometimes, it’s not about changing their mind, but influencing the many others who are less certain in their beliefs who are just reading along.

      • LinkOpensChest.wav
        link
        fedilink
        113 days ago

        In that case, it’s better to just make a top-level comment that’s far more likely to be read than a response 4 replies deep in an insufferable debate. You don’t continue the chess game for the sake of spectators once the pigeon has shat all over the board and knocked the pieces on the ground repeatedly. They’re just wasting your time at that point, which for most of them is their only goal in the first place.

        • LinkOpensChest.wav
          link
          fedilink
          43 days ago

          Also, people vastly overestimate how many people are actually going to read an argument between two online people. Only the most chronically online of redditors read that shit. Most people find it very off-putting, and you actually risk losing credibility if you continue to engage. (Said as someone who has very much and repeatedly made the error of continuing to engage.)

      • @TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        33 days ago

        If someone can be convinced into racism and hatred they were predisposed to assholery anyway.

        Fair though.

        Suppose I am too jaded to entertain them anymore. Can only hear so much before entertaining the nonsense wears on my mental.

      • originalucifer
        link
        fedilink
        13 days ago

        how is blocking someone helping influence other people? youre the only human the block affects. its no different than ignoring them.

        • @Stovetop@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          43 days ago

          I think they mean not letting the ideas go unchallenged. If someone is reading through and sees a bunch of Nazis posting hate all up somewhere with no one else saying anything, they might assume that sort of behavior is just tacitly accepted and influence their perception of the community as a whole.

  • Vanth
    link
    fedilink
    English
    303 days ago

    I’m here for entertainment, as I assume most people are. If seeing that sort of rhetoric is a negative to you, block it. Marie Kondo your online life and yeet anything out the window that doesn’t spark joy. Put your anti-MAGA efforts towards improving your IRL community where you don’t have to futilely battle pseudonymous trolls.

      • Vanth
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        That’s why I said this part

        Put your anti-MAGA efforts towards improving your IRL community where you don’t have to futilely battle pseudonymous trolls.

        Edit: that was a little blunt. To elaborate, I don’t engage everyone I see in the grocery store wearing a MAGA hat. I don’t knock on the door of everyone flying a Trump flag. I don’t engage the white nationalist ass hat spouting off in the bar. We pick our battles based on many factors, including personal safety and well being. Find a way to help that actually does something and makes you feel good about it.

  • @Mallspice@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    12
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Bully them. The only way to deal with a bully is to show your strength.

    You know how a lot of libs like to police language? That’s weak and only pisses off bullies. Instead, use their language against them. For example, a decent liberal would never do this but you can do more emotional damage to a maga and make a point they would understand by calling them a ‘regarded fage’ (paraphrasing because that is a ban worthy insult in many places online) over and over again than you ever could by using logic against them.

    You might not like it, but nut shots and low blows work better.

  • Don’t feed the trolls. If you find a bigot willing to have a good faith debate, maybe, but there is no reasoning with cult members. They have to want to change.

  • @Ledericas@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    52 days ago

    i block those fools, and the community in conservatives, some of them are bots too. theres a reason they are here, banned from reddit for the same thing.