575
they would never explain how. the ambiguity is the point. disgusting hypocrisy (lemmy.world)
submitted 9 months ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
64 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 22 points 9 months ago (2 children)

The only almost exception is in response to sea-lioning, when the request for an explanation is made in bad faith

But that's what LMGTFY links are for.

http://lmgtfy2.com/?q=sealioning

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 9 months ago (1 child)

    While I don't disagree, I do feel like people are over-quick to label any hard questions that don't align with thier viewpoint as sealioning.

    I've more than once asked questions about the practicality or edge cases of a particular stance and been called a sealion for it.

    But the thing is, I want to know how that thing handles the practicality or edge case issues, and am trying to have someone who is deeper into the weeds on the issue than I am explain it to me, but just get called a sealion for it.

    To be fair, this has only happened to me 2-3 times, but it's super annoying, because I'm actually trying to understand, and might even be on your side if you'd address my concerns.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 9 months ago*

    Agreed completely.

    There are folk for whom reductio ad absurdum is a personal attack, and those for whom it's a perfectly reasonable form of asking for refinement.

    To pick an easy example -- if we support neo-genders, we absolutely should treat someone who claims to "identify as an attack helicopter" as such and strive to use their claimed neo-pronouns. (Thankfully, one doesn't need to support neo-genders to respect trans-gender and a-gender individuals or those unsure of their gender ).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent