Sealioning

[steatopygia]

Unfortunately, not parody.

[MrDibble]

@mjmlabs

I cannot take this seriously. Is this some masterful parody that I’m being whooshed on, or do you actually believe this balderdash?

You must not be familiar with our resident Sooper Genius.

[purplehorseshoe]

I missed it. What does any of this have to do with the aquatic mammal?

[Kobal2]

@MrDibble

You must not be familiar with our resident Sooper Genius.

I love that, in his mind, all cis white dudes must, perforce, be islamophobic. And sealions. How’s that for a corncob ?

[MrDibble]

I’d say our resident racist, misogynist Islamophobe is lighthousing like a motherfucker.

[VinylTurnip]

@mjmlabs

I cannot take this seriously. Is this some masterful parody that I’m being whooshed on, or do you actually believe this balderdash?

SlackerInc is a mediocre mind in a candy shell of grandiosity, so turgid with shit that he’s well advised to keep clear of sharp objects. For unexplained reasons, he delights in advertising his deficiencies loudly, at every opportunity, to anyone who’ll listen. So no, I don’t think he kidding. And yes, it is very, very sad.

[iiandyiiii]

@MrDibble

I’d say our resident racist, misogynist Islamophobe

Gonna have to be a bit more specific here…

[RitterSport]

@SlackerInc

Regardless of that disingenuous explanation, it’s pretty clear that the bigotry is a feature and not a bug. “Sea lions” are obviously straight cisgender white guys. This insult, like “mansplaining”, is intended as some sort of force field to prevent woke people (mostly women) from having to actually defend their arguments when challenged in a civil manner* by straight white dudes. A not terribly distant cousin is “Islamophobia”.

*This is key, because we have seen a lot of feminists getting attacked by non-civil and even threatening straight white dudes. That was easy to dismiss for obvious reasons. But when they increasingly encountered guys who challenged their arguments without being threatening or even using abusive language, they had to come up with some excuse to not be expected to defend their points with evidence and logic.

I’ve already been badly whooshed in this thread, so I have to assume this is parody, right?

Novelty Bubble, now that I understand this better, think of the cartoon this way. Instead of a sea lion, it’s a specific kind of troll that follows you around asking for cites, focusing on specific definitions, and tone policing rather than engaging in the substance of the debate. So, in the first frame, the woman, she says “I hate those specific kinds of trolls that follow you around, asking for cites, focusing on definitions, and tone policing rather than engaging in debate.” Then, he says, “Uh oh, you’ve engaged the specific kind of troll…etc.” It gets tedious. So, define that kind of troll as a sea lion:

Let:
sea lion = the specific kind of troll that…etc.

Then, it makes more sense, right? I guess this was a trolling method that was pretty well known on other boards, probably those with crappy moderation, and it was begging for a definition. I only really participate here and, rarely, on a photography board that doesn’t have any debates, so I had never noticed it before, but I bet it’s more common on reddit and other places.

[MrDibble]

@RitterSport

I guess this was a trolling method that was pretty well known on other boards, probably those with crappy moderation, and it was begging for a definition.

I saw the comic when it first came out and immediately recognised the behaviour from right here, where there were (and remain) many fine practitioners of the art. The moderation level’s got nothing to do with it - here it gets a pass because it’s polite.

You know, the same way racists can get away with saying racist shit about Blacks or Muslims …

[Shodan]

@Riemann

I think the essence of sealioning is simply that you are not remotely open-minded about an issue, you enter a debate in an ostensibly polite and reasonable manner, but with a bad-faith aim to simply make people waste time debating you extensively and pointlessly.

Which covers a large majority of the political discussions on the SDMB, except not always with the “polite and reasonable” part. See: Banquet Bear, Czarcasm, Snowboarder Bo, etc., etc.

Regards,
Shodan

[Novelty_Bobble]

@RitterSport

Novelty Bubble, now that I understand this better, think of the cartoon this way. Instead of a sea lion, it’s a specific kind of troll that follows you around asking for cites, focusing on specific definitions, and tone policing rather than engaging in the substance of the debate. So, in the first frame, the woman, she says “I hate those specific kinds of trolls that follow you around, asking for cites, focusing on definitions, and tone policing rather than engaging in debate.” Then, he says, “Uh oh, you’ve engaged the specific kind of troll…etc.” It gets tedious. So, define that kind of troll as a sea lion:

Let:
sea lion = the specific kind of troll that…etc.

Then, it makes more sense, right?.

Bobble to be precise (if that doesn’t make me too pedantic, pinnipedantic?)

I do understand how it was supposed to be read, the author has already explained it as well. I just don’t think it is particularly smart or perceptive but regardless of my personal tastes, it also risks spawning a term that is so broad in scope and so easy to deploy that it can be used to nuke a debate from orbit rather than have to defend a position.

If it only ever gets used in the specific way the author intended then fine, I’ll be wrong and happy to admit it. My faith in mankind restored slightly.

[Treppenwitz]

@Riemann

But even when everyone is debating in good faith, it’s pretty naive to enter any debate and ever expect to change the opinion of someone who has enough to conviction to support the opposing position. In general, the people you may influence in carefully laying out evidence and arguments are third party lurkers who may be less familiar with the issue…

You know, you may just be right on that.

j

[RitterSport]

@Shodan

Which covers a large majority of the political discussions on the SDMB, except not always with the “polite and reasonable” part. See: Banquet Bear, Czarcasm, Snowboarder Bo, etc., etc.

Regards,
Shodan

I don’t see it, but maybe that’s because they’re often arguing a side I agree with. At the risk of sealioning myself, do you have any examples?

I don’t often agree with your points in political discussions, but I don’t recall you doing the crap that HD gets up to. And, at least you’re willing to engage in the Pit.

[Slash1972]

It seems to me a lot of these examples are people spouting off baseless opinions like “Trump is a criminal” and then getting mad when someone asks them for anything that supports their opinion. Seems like a lot of so-called “sealioning” could be avoided if people just owned up with “I don’t have anything concrete to base my opinion on, I just think it’s true”

[Czarcasm]

@Slash1972

It seems to me a lot of these examples are people spouting off baseless opinions like “Trump is a criminal” and then getting mad when someone asks them for anything that supports their opinion.

A lot of these examples? For instance…

[RitterSport]

@Czarcasm

A lot of these examples? For instance…

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a thread with such a high risk of whooshing and also a high risk of asking for cites.

I’m not saying you’re being whooshed, but I might be. Again. Asking for cites in a sea lion thread is so meta.

[octopus]

@RitterSport

I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a thread with such a high risk of whooshing and also a high risk of asking for cites.

I’m not saying you’re being whooshed, but I might be. Again. Asking for cites in a sea lion thread is so meta.

Do you share the majority view? If so, asking for cites and being a pedantic jackass is proper adherence to board culture. If not… you are an obvious sealioning troll. C’mon man that’s the test.

[RitterSport]

@octopus

Do you share the majority view? If so, asking for cites and being a pedantic jackass is proper adherence to board culture. If not… you are an obvious sealioning troll. C’mon man that’s the test.

I remember one time that you added value to a thread that you participated in. Maybe one of the Kavanaugh threads? Anyway, that was nice.

[Shodan]

@RitterSport

I don’t see it, but maybe that’s because they’re often arguing a side I agree with. At the risk of sealioning myself, do you have any examples?

FWIW - Snowboarder Bo. Czarcasm does more of the JAQ part of sea-lioning. Banquet Bear is probably closer.

I don’t often agree with your points in political discussions, but I don’t recall you doing the crap that HD gets up to. And, at least you’re willing to engage in the Pit.

Although you are correct that it is harder to see when you agree with a post/poster.

I don’t see that HD is doing anything different from many other Dopers, maybe because I am more sympathetic to his views, and maybe because sea-lioning is IMO so common on the SDMB, and so I can see it when it is coming from the other side.

And I believe much of the issue with all the baffled fury against HurricaneDitka is because he doesn’t post in the Pit. The SDMB is way too used to being able to Pit people they don’t like, and both vent their spleen that way, and try to drive posters away. HD won’t do that, so all that is left is wearing out the Report Posts button and complaining in a forum where they have the frustrating suspicion that the subject of said spleen isn’t listening and/or doesn’t care.

FTR - I don’t think sea-lioning is, or should be, a warnable offense. At worst it’s tit-for-tat. At best, maybe the majority of the Dope can learn to develop a thicker hide for tactics they are so free to employ.

And again, FWIW, I don’t think you are sea-lioning, or if you are, I don’t care, and don’t think it hampers debate, discussion, or screaming. I think the SDMB would be markedly improved if everyone helped themselves to a heaping plateful of “get the fuck over yourself”, with a side order of “who gives a shit what he thinks?” Especially the side order. For a group with so high a level of confidence that anyone to the right of Eugene Debs is stupid and wrong and beneath contempt, they sure seem bothered with folks who express obviously wrong opinions.

The Dope as a whole needs, IMO, to learn that forcing the other side to admit they were wrong forms no necessary part of winning. When “someone is wrong on the Internet” they are generally persistently wrong. They aren’t going to acknowledge your devastating riposte or your irrefutable cite. Too bad. They don’t have to - they’re still wrong.

Regards,
Shodan

[octopus]

@RitterSport

I remember one time that you added value to a thread that you participated in. Maybe one of the Kavanaugh threads? Anyway, that was nice.

It’s a thread about sea lions. What’s so serious about that? Honestly though, people are obviously using this term, hypocritically I might add, as a deliberate tactic to smear people they don’t like. They are frustrated that HD follows the rules, aside from the contrived sealioning one, and they want him gone.

They don’t even care if they themselves get a warning or two as long as those warnings are spread over the group it doesn’t really matter.