World's Saddest Internet Argument Techniques

[cloudy]

Borrowed from Cracked:

1. Winning by Losing

However badly you have disproven or embarrassed this person, it turns out it was all a partof their master plan to get that reaction out of you to prove some kind of pint they can't seem to explain. They honestly seem to think that despite flailing uselessly in making their original argument, they are smooth enought to convince people they are a master puppeteer pulling everyone's strings.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument1.jpg

2. The Pity Riposte

When someone starts throwing out words like "droll' and "pathetic" and "amused" and generally trying to talk like a wealthy Bond villain, he come across less like the confident, cigar-smoking fellow he is imaging and more like a man who has been pantsed attempting to convince clothed people that they are the ones that should feel foolish.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument2.jpg

3. The Backtrack

If you can't unsay something you just realized is horribly wrong, the next best thing is to claim you never said it. This is an extremely ballsy maneuver on a forum without an editfunction, and usually forces reliance on the old, "oh, you just misinterpreted what I said" maneuver.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument3.jpg

 

[The_Fool]

I think you are pointing fingers at me and I think I am going to have to kiss you into submission. Yes, Ma'am....

 

[Katyusha]

Seen all of these. It's pathetic isn't it?

 

[3113]

J.R.R. Tolkien didn't write Harry Potter?

 

[cloudy]

4. Super Tunnel Vision

So they've dismantled your arguments and shredded all your points. Have they taken everything away from you? No! You still have you dig - no, wait, that's gone. There must be something though! Aha! Someone mentioned you made a grammar error. Attack it with all your might! Surely this is the foundation of all their arguments. Don't get distracted by the evidence or anything, man! Eyes on the prize!

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument4.jpg

5. Be your Own Wingman

Creating a second account to agree with your first one is most often called "sockpuppeting," but "wingman" sounds sadder. The "reverse wingman"is a variation where the second account jumps on the bandwagon making fun of the first one, apparently in an attempt to help the second account to become "the popular one" that the poster will continue to use.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument5.jpg

6. Hotel California Guest

They keep checking out but they never leave. Sometimes they demand to be banned or have their account deleted because this is a way of talking like you are done with the site without actually having to stop posting and give up the last word. This also sets them up for item #1 above when they can claim their banning was just what they wanted and you played into their hands.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument6.jpg

 

[cloudy]

7. The Innocent Question

Classic passive-aggression technique with the easy fallbackof "I was just asking questions!" which plays critics off as suppressors of ideas and critical thinking. Questions include, "Can this 911 video I just stumbled upon be real???' or "Why is it taboo to just explore whatmakes different races smarter than others?" See, because they're not saying one race is better than another. They're asking.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument7.jpg

8. First Amendment Reinterpretation

Activist judges have nothing on internet people, who reinterpret an amendment guaranteeing freedom from government repression as a law protecting them from any criticism of their ideas and ever requiring other people to spend money creating and maintaining a platform for them to get their ideas out. Strangely, this guardian angel of a law is only meant to protect them and not their critics.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument8.jpg

 

[cloudy]

10.Unbelievable Credentials

What proofdo you have that this guy is not, as he claims, a physicist, a doctor, a Supreme Court Justice, a former Delta Force assassin, a Hollywood director, and Strunk of Strunkl & White? It's the internet, you'll never be able to prove he isn't who he says! Well, except for the little matter of him not knowing the slightest thing aboutany of those subjects.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument10.jpg

11. The Edgy Card

This is a variant of Super Tunnel Vision above, but it's so prevalent it needs a special mention. Do you dislike one of this person's jokes or artworks? It's not because it's bad or poorly done or doesn't make any sense. It's because YOU DON'T GET IT, MAN. It's too ironic for you to understand, or possibly it's so offensive that your puritan sensibilities reject it. It must be one of the other.

ex:

http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n124/phyde1987/argument11.jpg

********************************

This has been a public service announcement. Please enjoy your regular programming.​

 

[Guest]

Why do you hate freedom?

 

[3113]

Why do you hate freedom?

She just doesn't get the edgy jokes. I am, by the way, a physicist, Delta Force assassin (retired) and a rocket scientist. Just in case anyone wants to argue that point.

P.S. I think I like best of all about these examples are the names used by the faux losers

 

[Guest]

She just doesn't get the edgy jokes. I am, by the way, a physicist, Delta Force assassin (retired) and a rocket scientist. Just in case anyone wants to argue that point.

P.S. I think I like best of all about these examples are the names used by the faux losers

They seem completely believable to me.

Except perhaps the hotchick666. What a slut.

 

[Guest]

She just doesn't get the edgy jokes. I am, by the way, a physicist, Delta Force assassin (retired) and a rocket scientist. Just in case anyone wants to argue that point.

P.S. I think I like best of all about these examples are the names used by the faux losers

And I must correct your punctuation. You've posted without a period after your final sentence. For shame.

 

[BlackShanglan]

I can't believe "that was my little brother / psychotic child / mother / father / babysitter posting, not me" didn't get a mention. And let's not forget the ever popular REPETITION in BIG CAPITAL LETTERS of the UNSUPPORTED CLAIM, as if the problem was the font size and not the utter lack of support.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And I must correct your punctuation. You've posted without a period after your final sentence. For shame.

A smiley is punctuation-- you should know that

And let's not forget the ever popular REPETITION in BIG CAPITAL LETTERS of the UNSUPPORTED CLAIM, as if the problem was the font size and not the utter lack of support.

Or in a fancy font and color...

 

[al_Ussa]

That pretty much sums up the general boards right there.

 

[Handley_Page]

. . . . . .

 

[Liar]

There's winning, and then there's Godwinning.

 

[Verdad]

Brilliant, Cloudy. I take it you noticed the same thing I did.

 

[3113]

Or in a fancy font and color...

Hey! The fancy color and font proves the point if you've got graphs.

 

[3113]

Just re-read some of those arguments...Koreans aren't mythical creatures?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

And USUAL SUSPECTS are what theyre called.

 

[Stella_Omega]

And USUAL SUSPECTS are what theyre called.

And your friends who send you private messages all agree with you, of course.

 

[LaRocha]

Best Internet argument technique on a creative site is definitely when someone rips someone's work, justly or unjustly, then when they're asked if they have anything worth critiquing they say, "Yes, but you can't see it because it's awesome and fabulous, has won so many awards and everyone loves it. I just don't want you to rip it now that I've been snotty to you. But believe me, it's better than anything you've ever written and I'm probably right."

 

[Stella_Omega]

Best Internet argument technique on a creative site is definitely when someone rips someone's work, justly or unjustly, then when they're asked if they have anything worth critiquing they say, "Yes, but you can't see it because it's awesome and fabulous, has won so many awards and everyone loves it. I just don't want you to rip it now that I've been snotty to you. But believe me, it's better than anything you've ever written and I'm probably right."

"I create under a different name on a different site, and I don't want trolls dragging my rankings down."

 

[sr71plt]

Best Internet argument technique on a creative site is definitely when someone rips someone's work, justly or unjustly, then when they're asked if they have anything worth critiquing they say, "Yes, but you can't see it because it's awesome and fabulous, has won so many awards and everyone loves it. I just don't want you to rip it now that I've been snotty to you. But believe me, it's better than anything you've ever written and I'm probably right."

In other words, like claiming superiority in critiquing erotica here when you don't post any here?

 

[MagicaPractica]

And let's not forget the ever popular REPETITION in BIG CAPITAL LETTERS of the UNSUPPORTED CLAIM, as if the problem was the font size and not the utter lack of support.

I ran into that one recently. He could have had a valid point but I don't like being yelled at so I walked away. I prefer discussions.