There comes a time in every discussion forum user's life that they espouse an unpopular opinion. Not something unpopular in a way that they have broken any rules. But unpopular in a way that many other users want to chime in with their disagreement.
Ratioed
On twitter it is called getting "ratioed" where the unpopular tweets have a higher than normal number of comments relative to likes and retweets. It is viewed as a negative thing to happen when you are on twitter, because saying unpopular things on twitter is seen as bad.
Here on themotte saying unpopular things is not bad. We are here to have discussions with people who have different points of view. If you say something unpopular but not against the rules then you are serving the purpose of themotte. Not only have you not done something bad, you have done something good. You have provided everyone else here with content. There might be some tribal instincts in the back of your head screaming warnings at you "oh no! you have said something unpopular. quick! defend yourself, moderate your position, attack your most aggressive detractors!" These instincts are wrong. Instead, by saying something unpopular you have become the bell of the ball. The star athlete that all the recruiters want. Etc etc. We all want to talk to you!
Death by a thousand cuts
Being the center of attention and wanted by everyone can be stressful, especially when it feels like a form of infamy. There is a common failure mode that we as the mods have to witness happen again and again. The person that is at the center of attention is getting minor attacks that don't rise to the level of moderation. Multiple people might say the equivalent of "I think you are wrong because you aren't smart", or other forms of implied insults. The person at the center of attention will eventually get worn down by all these small cuts and jabs, and they will lash out at someone making the jabs. The lash out often does rise to the level of moderation.
You are the solution
The mods have talked about this phenomenon and we have realized that there isn't a good way to solve this problem through moderation. But! That doesn't mean there is no good solution at all.
These are the strategies I have used when getting ratioed, they've kept me sane, kept me calm, and helped me enjoy my time far more:
-
Attitude - You are the popular one. Everyone wants to talk with you. Keep these in mind to avoid the tribal anxiety of 'everyone hates me I have to defend myself!'
-
Match Effort - There are lots of responses flying at you and these responses have varying levels of effort. If someone has a low effort comment I do not respond with a well researched and cited response, I will often try and avoid responding to low effort comments altogether. Remember, you are the bell of the ball, they need to come to you.
-
Prioritize the Best - Try and respond to your best disagreers first. The ones that bring up the best points, address all the things you said, or are just very polite about how they say it. You should be rewarding their effort, and hopefully signalling to other potential commentors that this is the type of comment you will respond to. This also helps with the next piece of advice:
-
Refer back to yourself - Don't get frustrated saying the same thing a bunch of times. If you find yourself having the same argument in two different places, then only have it in the place with the better disagreer, and then point the other people to those posts, or just extensively quote yourself. "I addressed your point while talking with [other user], see my comment here(link)".
-
Limit the back and forth - I will usually only give one response to most users. I will try and match their effort and address their points. I will try and have an extended discussion only with the best disagreers. So many instances of me moderating people happen ten or fifteen comments deep into a conversation, when almost everyone else has stopped reading. Both sides have already said the same thing multiple times, and they just become frustrated at each other "How can you resist the amazing logic and beauty of my arguments! Only a cretin and scum could fail to be convinced!" My suggestion is to just say your point and get out. You should expect to not have the last word when you are getting ratioed, so just embrace that reality up front.
-
Leave when you are done - Sometimes even with all these strategies you might reach the end of your patience. You just don't want to talk about it anymore. Try and be introspective and recognize when you have reached this point. Once it happens, thank your best disagreer for the good discussion, say you are done with this topic and leave the discussion. Do not feel obligated to respond to additional comments. Your further participation is only likely to get you in trouble. You will likely get more and more frustrated until you lash out.
I also have advice for when you see someone getting ratioed and you want to join in on the dogpile. But that advice is more of a charitable nature, like it would be helpful to the community as a whole, but probably not as much to you personally. If people are interested I'll add it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I openly identify as a "pedofascist" here. I don't think I can relate at all to caring enough about this issue to write this long of a post about it.
Here's my short advice that I think is both more succinct and superior to yours (which again in my view is unnecessarily lengthy for such a minor issue): It's just text on a screen. It means nothing. It can't hurt you. (Somebody implied that they were going to throw me in a woodchipper on here like a day ago, to which I responded with German loli visual novel song lyrics. What's he gonna do about it? Nothing.)
Engage as much as is entertaining and/or intellectually stimulating for you. Then leave. (I guess that's similar to a suggestion you made too, but mine's quicker.)
PS: It's "belle of the ball", not "bell".
As a fellow “unpopular ideology haver” in this space (though I think you’ve got me handily beaten when it comes to the relative unpopularity) I think you might be understating the potential value of presenting a compelling - or, barring that, at least not actively off-putting - face for your positions. This means that it can be valuable to make a sincere and concerted effort to respond - responsibly, respectfully, and with appreciable effort - to interlocutors, even after you are personally no longer interested in the conversation or you feel like you’ve gotten the most that you’re personally going to get out of it. You never know when your response, however perfunctory and unnecessary it might feel internally, may be what leads an interlocutor to see your position in a new light, or even to just become slightly more positively-inclined to you, and by extension others who may (hopefully) express similar views in the future.
There's value in both, tbh.
Actually 'converting' someone to 'fascism / white nationalism' is best done by totally ignoring the race superiority and fascism parts for a while, because that's obviously wrong, and convincing people of the whole slate of reactionary aesthetics, various forms of last-man emptiness and degeneracy as bad and purposeless, the truth of nature and hierarchy, will and strength, war separating out strong from weak, as the father of all things in nature, etc, each in ways that play off of the individual's personal experiences and ideas - and then building the more directly taboo parts on top of that. (and the same goes for any other kind of significant set of ideas someone would dislike, easy to write a list for anarchism or stalinism or whatever). This isn't even manipulative, exactly - if that was something you agreed with, it just sounds correct and practical "if someone is christian and you want to convince them of atheism, don't just scream GOD IS FAKE HERES BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS, explain how physics and natural selection explain so much of the world and then bring in god-fake as a natural conclusion to that" and that's basically the same as "to explain particle physics, probably start with algebra first"
But having someone who presents extreme, even ironic / exploring taboo areas views is also good, because it leads you & observers to consider them directly! "pedofascist" is probably ironically overstated, although there are definitely unironic pedofascists out there, but having someone come directly in with "slavery and monarchy are good" or "war and culling of the weak are good" is valuable, even if those are deeply wrong, because one needs to consider the ideas and what they mean. Although the latter are arguably better done by old books/writing than anyone actually alive today.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link