[ryandrake]

Speaking of the meta-realm, I've always wondered how messages in forum flamewars always seemed to gravitate toward a very specific pattern:

<personal insult>

<the point>

<bait to continue flaming>

You see this pattern all over the Internet. For example, from that bodybuilding.com thread:

    Are you retarded? [personal insult]

    Maybe you should look at a calander, I didn't double count sunday, my two weeks started and ended on sunday, exactly 14 days. [the point]

    What don't you understand? [bait to continue flaming]

[emmelaich]

There's a related, more polite version of "are you retarded" which is not uncommon even here on HN. It is "I'm confused". I don't know whether it's a phrase that I'm over analysing, but it always comes across as disingenuous to me.

The responder is never actually confused, they have a question that they should just ask.

[rapidaneurism]

Haha, I do the I'm confused, but that is:

1 me being polite and not calling you an idiot.

2 me hedging my bets in case I am the idiot.

[worble]

Yeah I definitely do that too. I've never really thought about why I use that language, but thinking about it, it feels like a short hand and slightly politer way of saying

> I think you're wrong

> Here's why I think you're wrong

> Please correct me if I've misunderstood something

[neuroticnews25]

And I thought this is the pinnacle of being a well mannered netizen. It turns out you actually shouldn't even THINK of others as idiots?

[hoseja]

The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.

[amadeuspagel]

There's also "I'm retarded" or "Retard here".

[dcminter]

Uh... I use "I'm confused" a lot. Because often I am confused! Someone said something that didn't make sense given what I know.

It divides fairly evenly (I think, being generous to myself here) between:

Yep, something I thought was true was not true.

Something they said was wrong, or they omitted something without which their meaning was ambiguous.

Maybe a smattering of "I/they misparsed what was said" too. But really. Often I'm just confused. When I use it I definitely don't mean they're an idiot I just worry that they'll think I'm an idiot... (...and that they might be right.)

[hoseja]

The poster is likely confused at how anybody can be so r-slurred.

[imtringued]

There is no better way to destroy the ability to communicate than by assuming there is evil lurking around every corner and all you have to do is uncover it!

[lupusreal]

Thinking that every conversation you have is high stakes, that the fate of the world hangs in the balance to be decided by your ability to conquer your conversational opponents, is a really insidious form of mind rot that is prevalent across the web and seems to know no ideological bounds.

Maybe it's just what happens when narcissists get online. The inability to acknowledge that the argument doesn't matter and so you can chill out and let retards be retards is fundamentally a failure in humility.

[thinkingemote]

"I really don't understand why people would think X"

is another example but I think there may be some expression of non-understanding. "So retarted it doesnt make sense."

Similar, "are you a n*zi" never seen here but as a simple but clever "Could you elaborate?" often as a reply to a polite but ambiguous comment. It's basically bait for the ambiguous commenter to confirm or deny the morality of their comment.

[dbuder]

"genuinely curious" is the new one I see everywhere lately.

[close04]

"Genuinely curious" or "honest question" are the internet equivalent of "don't shoot, I'm coming out with my hands up". The disclaimer people feel the need to put so they don't catch a bullet for no good reason, when most internet forums are filled to the brim with trigger happy people with itchy fingers and immunity from consequences (barring a few reputation points).

[thinkingemote]

Could be similar to "I'm not trying to be offensive but ${offensive statement}" Its a kind of disclaimer but more often found in speech than on websites.

I like playing with this sometimes by saying something like "I'm not trying to be racist but have you noticed that the weather is a bit cold today"... "that wasn't racist?!" ... "yes, I said it wasn't"

[dcminter]

> "Genuinely curious" is the internet equivalent of a "don't shoot, I'm coming out with my hands up".

Ha, that's a great thought and I will doubtless quote (steal) it in the future.

[emmelaich]

Yes! Like "real question" it should be redundant.

[sph]

The passive aggressive Gen Z version is “make it make sense” which I despise

[steve_adams_86]

Something I’ve noticed (and which is present among all people, but seems particularly common with younger people today) is a sort of unconsidered, unobserved sense of authority over social matters.

I know this was a thing when I was a kid, but something is different now. I watch my kids do it and part of me gets it, but another part of me wonders if it’s heavily influenced by something modern like social media.

It leads to this sort of attitude, like thinking you can tell people to make it make sense. It offloads a lot of cognitive burden onto others while assuming a position of authority.

I don’t want this to sound like “kids these days!”, because I don’t think it’s as simple as that. Perhaps it’s most obvious in kids because the attitude is most well-imprinted in them, but it’s absolutely present elsewhere in older people as well. Yet I didn’t see it so prevalent when I was younger.

It’s very common in political debates. Part of what exemplifies it best is a reluctance or outright refusal to do the mental labour of explaining one’s position on a matter. That is, without fail, someone else’s job. You’ve already got it figured out. It’s their fault that they don’t get it.

Like, you don’t get why Some Idea is correct and all Other Ideas are stupid? Your loss. Make it make sense.

I’m missing a lot here. Fundamentally it’s an unwillingness and a failure to actually engage, participate in having and defending ideas, and being accountable to held beliefs. I have to constantly tell my kids to own their beliefs and understand them, because they’re remarkably comfortable adopting and espousing ideas and beliefs without examination and intentionality.

I’m not claiming it’s a problem with youth though. I think it’s a problem with the dispersal and sheer density of information these days. People are overwhelmed. More than ever we go with vibes over actual considered interpretations of what we encounter. The default in the vibe based information economy is to assume a confident position and refuse to engage in good faith discussions, because you’re not even sure how you got where you are. People’s belief systems are like a social media Plinko machine.

I don’t mean that condescendingly. There’s so much information, so much to process, so many complex matters, etc. We’re all maxed out. Make it make sense.

[sph]

Good post, and I believe indeed it is caused by social media and newer generations molded by it.

Go find some controversial discussion from 80-something years ago on Youtube, say, about homosexuality. Even as an older Millennial it feels the ability to entertain and politely discuss ideas we do not own nor approve of has completely disappeared. Now it’s literally just black and white, right or wrong, with or against us, with no nuance or possibility for one’s opinion to move towards compromise. It’s two camps making hateful memes about the other.

We are not made for this style of socialization and discourse, and no one is taking this problem seriously. It worries me a lot.

[Vinnl]

That's basically the opposite of /s - "I know it's hard to tell whether something is sarcasm or not through text, so I want to emphasise that I am not".

Of course, people will inevitably use it sarcastically.