I think I know what the consensus is going to be, but I am currently worked up, so here goes anyway. Maybe I just want sympathy.
What response, if any, should I make to fake news purveyors and liars who, claiming unverifiable expert authority, engage me on social media and deny things I know to be true?
For example, claiming that some nationally-known incident didn’t occur or was faked?
Now, in this case, I know it was real, from considerable secondhand evidence and personal conversations with many firsthand witnesses.
And I know that the people making this claim don’t really believe themselves; they are simply using a lie as a political weapon, as their master taught them. They have the gall to post under fake names to castigate me for not revealing my own name and private information.
I do not harbor any fantasy of converting these liars. But would there be any point to engaging them? I cannot offer any authority more convincing than they can (my “I know people who were there” is no more convincing than their “I have years of expert training in forensics”) and while I can make an appeal to logic and parsimony, I don’t know if that will be influential to any fence-sitters or undecided.
I could also forcibly delete their comments so that their political lie do not appear, at least in the media I have some control over. Is that preferable to speaking calmly against evil, or remaining silent and letting idiocy and evil make its own bed?
I would delete and ignore. If they are truly trolls, they are just trying to piss you off. If they really believe the nonsense they are peddling, that’s what they want to believe and facts aren’t really pertinent.
If you’ve identified them as trolls, you’ve answered your own question. If you have the power to delete what you know to be untrue, why not do so, and then ignore or block them? You have no obligation to try to convert the unconvertible.
If they get under your skin, you should probably just delete and ignore.
When I’m bored, I like to engage them as I find it mildly entertaining. And occasionally, as I’m researching, or looking for links to rebut whatever stupid thing it is they are saying, I inadvertently learn something new.
Make fun of them, if it amuses you. If it doesn’t, delete and get on with your life.
It’s one thing to respond because they got under your skin. That never works out. It’s quite another to respond because you have the perfect one-liner, or otherwise to make clear that you are using them for entertainment and that you aren’t taking them seriously. Treat it like a good Pit thread, IOW.
Sorry to change the subject (but the consensus is already clear), but is “iff” known to civilians? My wife just confirmed that if she didn’t know me, she would have no idea what it meant. Incidentally, there is a French equivalent “ssi”.
I’m a civilian. I was enrolled in ROTC in high school (technically, jROTC, I think), but it was mandatory and only for a year, and I was not exposed to it, there.
For me IFF stands for “If, and only if” and is a mathematical term. Such as, X-Y = 0 iff X=Y. It describes a condition that is not only necessary for the conclusion, but the only condition that will result in that conclusion.
I thought “iff” was “if and only if”. I don’t know that it has another meaning in military terminology.
You should engage them if and only if there’s an audience of people who might be undecided, and there’s a chance that you might sway some of those undecideds.
I read it as the mathematical term for if and only if, but I watch a bunch of numberphile, and they like to use it sometimes.
I didn’t think of military use of it until you brought it up, but had heard of it from various parts of popular culture. I assume you are thinking of identification of friend or foe? Not sure how that fits in the context.
I’ve found that anything beyond ignoring them takes emotional energy. Even though I know they’re just trying to piss off people, sometimes it works. I’m guessing you don’t have much emotional energy to spare right now. Is it possible for you to stay away from the places where they congregate? Facebook? Twitter? Some threads here?
It’s not used in everyday language, if that’s what you’re asking. I would only use it in very specific circumstances if I know the person I’m talking to is reasonably versed in math and/or logic. I think I first learned the term in geometry class back in sophomore year high school. (I’m assuming you mean “civilian” in a figurative sense here. If it has a military meaning that makes sense in context, then I don’t know it. I know Identification Friend or Foe, but that’s obviously not what you’re talking about and “ssi” in French looks like it could mean “if and only if.”)
I’m completely non-military, and I use the term in its mathematical meaning. And even then, only in a context where people are likely to understand it, like the Smartest, Hippest People on the Planet.
I would absolutely have in depth discussions about finances, family size and housing preferences first…
Serious answer - probably not, unless you are willing to invest a lot of time in coming up with a well written, extensively cited rebuttal. That would be the only way that you may sway a “fence sitter”. Even then it will likely do no good - no harm, but no good.
I believe Mr. Seldon is a phsychohistorian – I mean, mathematician.
I believe he’s using “civilian” in the colloquial sense of “people who don’t share my profession”, not in the “people who aren’t in the military” sense.
I agree with Chronos. If this is in a public forum or social media, respond in the way that will best represent your side. Even if logic and evidence don’t sway the troll, calm composure and taking the high road will impress onlookers who might have agreed with the troll at first glance.
Unfortunately, sometimes deleting everything is the only sensible choice. But I try to let the troll out themselves as a crazy troll while simply representing my side the best way I can, both logically and emotionally.
