Sealioning • Hacker News Board

Re: Sealioning

#21

Post by hprotagonist » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 3:45 PM UTC

JadeNB wrote: post #9

hprotagonist wrote: post #3

I highly recommend wondermark in general. The “Sick Elephant” running gag in 2019 was a stroke of genius: http://wondermark.com/c1414/ And “in which there is quite the selection” runs through my head every time i go to the nice packie and try to buy a beer http://wondermark.com/515/

Sick Elephant was one of those that was funny for a bit, then became unfunny, then became so surreally persistent that it was hard not to laugh at the sheer stubborn audacity of it. But, yes, it's not too many relatively obscure webcomics that get to contribute a term to the popular discourse like that, and I think that the Wondermark archives will repay the examination.

I was fully converted to “oh this is great” around about the Chekov iteration.

Re: Sealioning

#22

Post by JasonFruit » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 4:43 PM UTC

ryandvm wrote: post #20

trabant00 wrote: post #15

Dogpiling, gaslighting, sealioning, just a few of the made up words with a vague enough definition to be used in claiming harassment in any situation. PS: if you disagree with me you're duckfencing!

Indeed. Just classifying and dismissing arguments based on these memetic argumentation taxonomies has become a debating strategy unto itself.

It's kind of like people who hear a real-world argument, and dismiss it by naming a logical fallacy, e.g. "Straw man!" They fail to recognize that an argument may not be strictly valid as proof, but still carries some weight when evaluated in light of observation.

For example, "I don't believe chemtrails are a thing, because my friend is an aircraft mechanic, and he's never seen any sign of equipment to spray mind-altering chemicals from commercial planes." "Appeal to authority!"

Re: Sealioning

#23

Post by laughingbovine » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 7:11 PM UTC

trabant00 wrote: post #15

Dogpiling, gaslighting, sealioning, just a few of the made up words with a vague enough definition to be used in claiming harassment in any situation. PS: if you disagree with me you're duckfencing!

My brain like your brain. Who need word when smaller word do trick. Double plus agree.

Re: Sealioning

#24

Post by trabant00 » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 7:11 PM UTC

rjknight wrote: post #5

lqet wrote: post #2

Here is the origin of the term: http://wondermark.com/c/2014-09-19-1062sea.png

I remember being very confused by the reaction to this when it first appeared. My initial reading was that the first line is meant to be analogical with racism, since the speaker holds an irrational prejudice against a particular biological category. When questioned on it, they refuse to explain or apologise! It took me a while to grasp the alternate reading in which the sea lion is more like a subculture, such as "g…

Your comment is delicious. You notice yourself it wouldn't be such a nice comment if it where made about a group you want to protect but it's perfectly fine if it is made about a group you dislike. Proving, again, "no bad tactics, only bad targets".

Re: Sealioning

#25

Post by jfengel » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 8:18 PM UTC

bitshiftfaced wrote: post #4

I don't doubt that this is an actual thing. It also sounds like a thought-terminating cliche, useful when the accused won't let you off the hook for saying something wrong, but it is too painful to admit it.

It's both. Ultimately, the Internet has no arbitrator to enforce the rules of argumentation. By the time you're reduced to arguing about the rules, no progress is going to be made.

I consider that primarily a reason to cease engaging entirely. When you believe you're being sea-lioned, you don't really need to call it out. People who do are hoping for some sort of closure, but they aren't going to get it. You may be correct, or you may be merely trying your own dishonest means to win, but either way nothing productive is going to happen.

The best you can do is remind yourself that nobody actually cares. That's really hard to remember when somebody declares: "You've failed to supply the evidence therefore I win by default". Troll tactics rely on you feeling bad about losing in public, and believing that your side has lost adherents. Effectively, they've won before you've even started when you believe that the only way to win is for them to concede that you've supported yours side sufficiently. They will always be able to simply declare that you lost, one way or another.

The only way to avoid that is to not play at all. And the realization of sea-lioning is useful in that. It doesn't win an argument. Rather, it's your self-recognition that you will lose if you say anything else, and it's not worth your time. The sooner you forget about it, the faster you regain equilibrium. Even stopping to declare "No thanks, sea lion" doesn't really help unless you have the ability to shut down replies.

That can also be used badly, to be sure. It can be a troll tactic, and you deal as you would with other trolls. And it can be used to fool yourself; in the absence of an arbitrator you can't really know when you're missing a sincere argument. But I'd advise erring on the side of abandoning any arguments early, since it's never as important as you imagine it is. Even if you've failed to recognize a serious critique, you'll hear it again some day, probably soon. Sincere self reflection, offline, will bring you good answers faster than bashing yourself out against an army of trolls.

Re: Sealioning

#26

Post by w1zard0f0z » Wed, Jan 27, 2021, 10:55 PM UTC

jfengel wrote: post #25

bitshiftfaced wrote: post #4

I don't doubt that this is an actual thing. It also sounds like a thought-terminating cliche, useful when the accused won't let you off the hook for saying something wrong, but it is too painful to admit it.

It's both. Ultimately, the Internet has no arbitrator to enforce the rules of argumentation. By the time you're reduced to arguing about the rules, no progress is going to be made. I consider that primarily a reason to cease engaging entirely. When you believe you're being sea-lioned, you don't really need to call it out. People who do are hoping for some sort of closure, but they aren't going to get it. You may be c…

When everyone starts avoiding answering challenges to their opinion we end up in a highly divided society, where there is no understanding for the other points of view and no common ground. I think this is visible already in our world. There's a fine blurry line between challenges that address essential aspects of an idea and those that divert attention to minute details or go on tangents. I would say the ideal attitude would be to try and answer a couple of such "attacks" or explaining why they are besides the point.

Re: Sealioning

#27

Post by stale2002 » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 8:30 AM UTC

trabant00 wrote: post #15

Dogpiling, gaslighting, sealioning, just a few of the made up words with a vague enough definition to be used in claiming harassment in any situation. PS: if you disagree with me you're duckfencing!

The problem is that if someone is acting in bad faith, it is almost impossible to answer every single challenge that a truly bad faith actor might bring up.

And even if you answer 99 challenges correctly, but you instead make a single small mistake, or you mispeak, or the other person intentionally misinterprets what you are saying, then the bad faith actor can declare victory and "win" the debate, because of a single, irrelevant, or minuscule mistake.

If someone is not acting in bad faith, it is almost impossible to not lose to them.

Re: Sealioning

#28

Post by rjknight » Thu, Jan 28, 2021, 11:21 PM UTC

trabant00 wrote: post #24

rjknight wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember being very confused by the reaction to this when it first appeared. My initial reading was that the first line is meant to be analogical with racism, since the speaker holds an irrational prejudice against a particular biological category. When questioned on it, they refuse to explain or apologise! It took me a while to grasp the alternate reading in which the sea lion is more like a subculture, such as "g…

Your comment is delicious. You notice yourself it wouldn't be such a nice comment if it where made about a group you want to protect but it's perfectly fine if it is made about a group you dislike. Proving, again, "no bad tactics, only bad targets".

My comment says nothing about who I personally want to protect or dislike. I only describe my failure to guess how other people would react to the comic.