Categories
homophobia irony alert racism trump

Dude is mad [homophobic slur] and [ethnic slur] think his Trump shirt promotes hate

He mad
He mad, too

Oh, Trump fans, never change!

Ted • 20 hours ago Bernietard in Lit told me that I was promoting "hate" by wearing a Trump shirt. This dude is your quintessential SWPL faggot. Even before Trump he hated me. All because I called dramakids fags like a year ago. Aside from that and a few glares from spics, I got nods and thumbs ups from peers . My friends didn't make comment on it. They already know me as that trump supporter lol Being a vocal Trump fan hasn't damaged my life...yet. 2 • Reply•Share › Avatar Det. Snide Ted • 20 hours ago Fuck the spics. Keep up the good work.

 

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

481 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

@wwth

I feel the same way. I’m not the type to celebrate the death of a person (or animal), but the reality is that a truly vile person who had a lot of power is now gone. Zero sleep lost.

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

You just know the GOP will block confirmation of any nomination Obama makes in hopes of the Republican winning and putting a right wing justice in next year.

The problem is, if they do that, it will make them look terrible and become a slam dunk talking point for the Democratic candidate for president and for Democratic senate candidates in close races. It will be just one more thing in addition to the racism, misogyny, xenophobia, and homophobia that will put a lot of voters off of the Republican candidate.

It’s going to be quite a year for US politics.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

5) “Wants you to do their job”: Troll tells you in vague or non-specific terms to look for evidence that would support their assertions.
Example. Fifth Sibylline tells us to go to Pope Hat and look something up that they should already be providing us.

6) “Downplayed non-literalism or humor”: Troll claims something was meant ironically, sarcastically, humorously or other non-literal form which attempts to ignore the fact that the themes are still offensive or otherwise carry themes with social effects.
Example. In this post Fifth Sibylline is not directly downplaying racism because they use “ironic” in scare-quotes, but it’s a very common tactic.

7) “Minimization of social/personal effects”: Troll tries to claim or imply that something is not actually a problem in order to take social attention off of it and its related effects.
Example. In the same post as linked in 6 FS downplays the harm that Trump’s offensive meme posting supporters could do when the spreading culture is damaging enough since it reinforces and even grows community among xenophobic bigots.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ WWTH

it will make them look terrible

Is that likely to bother them?

I don’t mean the rhetorical sense. I think they’re using the “Millwall” model of “Nobody like us and we don’t care”. Their base will just care about the result and won’t be bothered about the opinion of the opposition. The opposition isn’t going to vote for them anyway so why care what a they think?

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

I’ll do the rest later since I need to do some other things.

A lot of this is comparable to other things but I like to represent things as actions taken in communications so they are more readily recognizable. I tend to see arguments the way other people might see a fighting style like grappling.These are tentative titles and descriptions and I will be trying to improve them.

weirwoodtreehugger
4 years ago

Is that likely to bother them?

I don’t mean the rhetorical sense. I think they’re using the “Millwall” model of “Nobody like us and we don’t care”. Their base will just care about the result and won’t be bothered about the opinion of the opposition. The opposition isn’t going to vote for them anyway so why care what a they think?

Oh, it won’t bother them. In fact, the Republican base loves shit like this. But it will bother undecided/swing voters and it will motivate the Democratic base and infrequent voters who vote Dem when they get off their asses and go to the polls. Plus, it’ll earn the GOP some negative media coverage. Low information voters don’t necessarily notice the day to day GOP obstructionism. To them it looks like both sides not getting along. But the GOP blocking a qualified supreme court nominee in an election with the transparent strategy of trying to wait out a Democratic presidency? That will look bad and even CNN and its love of the golden mean fallacy won’t be able to make it look like both side are equally at fault.

ej
ej
4 years ago

GOP has already reared and said they’ll block anyone President Obama is trying to appoint.

Ted Cruz has already come out to say that Obama shouldn’t get to nominate the next Supreme Court justice and that it should be the next president who gets to nominate someone.

So, we’re just supposed to go a year with only 8 justices? With only 8, there will be ties, and then what? I’m so tired of this tactic. It’s just like forcing the shutdown when Congress didn’t agree on the budget. They don’t like what’s being done, so they’ll make sure that NOTHING gets done at all.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

So basically… they’d get paid for almost a year for not doing their job?

Gosh.

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

Brony’s last message was superb. I can go to sleep with that piece said!

Monzach
Monzach
4 years ago

@Alan Robertshaw

I think the “Millwall” tactic could reasonably also be called the “Sex Pistols” tactic, since the Pistols sing “We’re the Pistols, no-one likes us. We’re the Pistols, and we don’t ca-a-are!”

This suggestion is brought to you as part of the solidarity effort towards people who would prefer not to see even tangential references to association football. 🙂

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ monzach

I’m perversely proud of the fact that, although I’ve done legal work for three professional football clubs, I’ve never been to a football match. 🙂

guy
guy
4 years ago

To clarify, I do not have any opposition to people knowing multiple languages. I just think it would be very nice if there was one language that everyone knew, even if they knew others. Language and culture are interrelated but not inextricable, and here people can communicate with people from other cultures because we all know English. Many of us also know other languages, and there’s no reason any country would need to stop teaching its current language.

I have heard of Esperanto; it was an attempt to achieve a shared language without using an existing one. I am of the opinion that it serves as a demonstration that doing so is impractical, and if we want a shared language, it should be one that many people already speak. I think English (the widespread variants are mutually intelligible so selecting one in particular is largely arbitrary) is probably the best candidate; while I have heard that more people speak Mandarin Chinese, I gather that if you go to a country that doesn’t primarily speak either in general you will have an easier time finding someone who speaks English. But I am not a linguist, and may only think English is the best language for the task because picking it would mean I wouldn’t have to do any work.

The US doesn’t have any particular mandatory foreign language, but in general in highschool and college you are expected to learn at least one; my high school required three years of one or two each of two. I took Latin because I tend to speak softly and am often misheard (especially by non-native speakers) and Classical Latin does not have a speech requirement in High School, though while I was still taking it in college I did have to recite one of the Catiline Orations.

The reason I’m taking Japanese at the moment is honestly pretty silly, but I’m at college and had free space in my schedule. As you may have noticed in the past couple threads I like anime a fair bit; that started in college. I’d read about it some on TVTropes, and when I was looking for something to do I decided to check out the school anime club*, and discovered I liked it quite a bit and have also taken up JRPGs. I also read up on various aspects that don’t translate properly. And there’s lots of things that aren’t translated, sometimes sequels to things that are translated, so I felt it would be kind of nice if I could order them from Japan and follow along with the help of a dictionary. So far I’m doing well with grammar patterns but not so well with vocab.

*At the time, showing Baccano!, Blue Exorcist, and Moretsu Space Pirates

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@bluecat

Anyone else read Woman on the Edge of Time by Marge Piercy? The utopians in that have a gender neutral pronoun “per” (short for person) which I found very plausible.

(I haven’t read the entire thread yet. Apologies if I repeat what others are saying.)

Yes! It’s been years and I still think about it. I love that book.

Here’s another one of Piercy’s that I love: He, She, and It. It’s another sci fi book, although most of her works are not sci fi.

I read the book when it came out in 1991, and in hindsight it seems prophetic in its vision of a dystopian future. Of course, the heroes fight this dystopia. Just like we do.

Must reread!

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@Brony, Social Justice Cenobite
I’m very much enjoying your analysis of our trollish, trolling troll with their Manufactured Outrage. Which, as far as I can tell, always comes first. Trolls take immediate, massive offense at something that another commenter has said.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Note that I’m using an odd idea of “troll” here. To me a “troll” is simply a person that causes a social disruption, and may or may not be doing it deliberately. For example more than one person has been accused of trolling by conservatives who wanted to discuss communism at the academic level. Also Libertarians who are being earnest have sometimes been accused of trolling. social disruptions can be caused by people being honest or dishonest.

@WWTH
Thanks for the tip about links!

@Kat
Thanks! One more set tonight. I was longer on what I was doing than what I thought. I hope to post the rest of them tomorrow, but this is only up to the second page of this thread and I’m finding it fascinating.

8) “Fake in-group member”: Troll claims to be either a member of a group or ally to boost reputation. Often combined with “opinion only”.
Example.
(also contains “redirected social momentum”)
Note that claims that this person is female is not a claim that I would challenge given the social situation. However fake ones are usually pretty good at adding detail that makes that identity irrelevant.

9) “Outrageous fake ally”: Troll pretending to be an in-group member or ally says bad, outrageous, incorrect or other things that can be used to discredit your group.
This is not present in the set of comments from FS from what I can see (your mileage may vary, I’m male and masculine), but I’ve seen it from time to time. It came to mind while I was working on this.

10) “Defend words that aren’t yours”: Without quoting you (presented as paraphrasing you) troll claims you took a position you did not take.
Example. In this example FS referred to generalizations in a non-specific way that makes it impossible to tell if they referred to me honestly, and referred to “flame-outs” when I never referred to people losing control (it was a matter of people knowingly posting shitty things).

11) “Pretends to answer your question”: Troll gives an answer that does not relate to your position.
Example. Same link as the last link. The entire section having to do with taboo breaking and “meme bioweapons lab” had nothing to do with the harm caused by people with reputations damaged from no practice and shitty acts.

12) “All bark and no bite”: Troll uses insults while performing badly in terms of providing evidence or argument so that emotion has more effect than objectivity.
Pretty much starts here. Since they don’t provide any substance the insults only add emotinal content.

13) “You’re going to regret that”: Troll claims that something you are doing/saying will end up hurting you or your side of a social conflict, usually with “opinion only”. The thing you are doing/saying is often something important to you strategically.
Example.
Troll claims that the narrative provided by Paradoxical Intention will only attract people angry at the narrative, as if that were not the reality of anyone trying to spread feminism.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

Last post, “from no practice and shitty acts” should have read “known practicing of shitty acts”. Basically they knew what they were doing.

EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

@Brony:
You should start a website collating trolling tactics and providing links to people using them, as a reference guide for people everywhere. Something like logicallyfallacious.com.

By “you should do it” I mean “your analysis is excellent and your approach of seeing it as a series of fighting moves is superb; if you lack the bothered to put this up on a website then I’ll gladly do it for you.”

The internet would benefit from such a resource.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@EJ (The Other One)
Seconded. This is great stuff for dealing with trolls both online and IRL.

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

Third paw up for troll tactics source.

opposablethumbs
opposablethumbs
4 years ago

Brony SJC, I think I remember you mentioning a while ago on Pharyngula that you were mulling over the idea of writing something like this – I can see now how usefully illustrative (and handy) it can be! Seconding EJ – definitely an excellent resource! ::waving manymany thumbs up::

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

@guy

To clarify, I do not have any opposition to people knowing multiple languages.

No worries, nothing in your earlier comment made it seem so. And just to be clear: neither do I oppose people learning multiple languages, I warmly encourage people to do so.

I also really hate to say this but you completely missed my point:

I think English (the widespread variants are mutually intelligible so selecting one in particular is largely arbitrary) is probably the best candidate;

I think the relevant question here is why English is spoken so widely as a native language. The original inhabitants of North America, India and Australia didn’t have it as their native language (or lingua franca in India’s case) until comparatively recently.

Language and culture are interrelated but not inextricable,

(I know I’m quoting you out of order, please allow it for now: I’m trying to make my reply flow better.)
I have to disagree with this to some degree: languages tend to die when the culture around them dies or changes drastically in a short period of time. Different languages also have different ways of saying things and have words for different concepts and as such carry with them the baggage inherent in the culture in which the language was born and developed.

To give an example: English is unfortunately fairly useless at discussing weather, since it lacks an amazing amount of words for different kinds of snow and related phenomena.
(Just to be clear: the above is not a reference to the “Inuit has 1000 words for snow” myth, but to the issues of explaining the local weather situation to my foreign friends. Something that I can describe in one word in my native language requires one-paragraph-long explanation in English.)

While languages don’t necessarily create how you see the world, they help you categorize it. Whether for example the language has gender-neutral or gender-specific personal pronouns (as discussed a few pages ago) or suffices in nouns affects how much relevance is placed on knowing someone’s gender and whether everyone is assumed to have a specific, immutable gender. As you know Japanese puts a lot more stock in what is the social status of the person in relation to others than what English does which forces you to pay more attention to social dynamics when speaking Japanese.

This essentially means that pushing a language on people will also inevitably to some degree push a different way to make sense of the world to them. USA is already exporting its culture and with it, its prejudices and values, to the rest of the world and in some cases slowly killing or diminishing parts of foreign cultures. Creating a new language to be the lingua franca would be the only even remotely fair solution to the language barrier problem. However, I definitely agree with you that it would never catch on and as such is impractical. I would instead propose using Tagalog, Latvian or some other language spoken in a country not having so much power combined with such a holier-than-thou attitude as an alternative.

This discussion is obviously entirely hypothetical, though, since there is (thankfully) no central authority who could enforce any kind of language requirement to the whole world. The situation will develop as it does and we will adapt to it to the degree that we need to.

Just be aware that generally, the one who can communicate in the discussion in their native language always has an edge and has an easier time to be taken seriously by the audience. If for no other reason, then for the fact that they don’t need to have the time, resources, energy and opportunity to first study a foreign language for several years to even be able to participate in the discussion in the first place.

I gather that if you go to a country that doesn’t primarily speak either in general you will have an easier time finding someone who speaks English [than someone who speaks Chinese]

Unless you go to Asia, or at least I have been told that the likelihood of finding someone who speaks Chinese in, say, Malaysia is pretty high. Whether higher than English, I don’t know. Do we have any lurkers from the region who could provide more information?

Proficiency in any given language is pretty regional, though. I have been to areas in Italy where you were more likely to find a local speaking German than one speaking English. No offense meant but I have noticed that Americans have a tendency to overestimate how widely and how well English is spoken around the world.

…Maybe this is partly caused by the internet where you mostly run into foreigners who are good at English, since those who are not, tend to either lurk or stay mainly on the sites using their native language or a foreign language they are more familiar with?

But I am not a linguist, and may only think English is the best language for the task because picking it would mean I wouldn’t have to do any work.

While I appreciate your honesty, I would like to point out the other side of that coin: you are saying that everyone else in the whole world should learn a specific second language just in case they’ll need to talk with someone speaking a different language. The fact that there will be a need to converse with foreigners is not a given in all areas of the world. Should people in situations where it is unlikely still learn English just in case? I’m pretty sure you don’t mean that.

What if they only need to converse with one or two foreign cultures, neither of which speaks English as their native language? It would make more sense for them to learn the languages of those cultures instead of English.

Thank you for the explanation of how the language studies in US work. I was already familiar with it, but there likely are regulars/lurkers who weren’t, so it’s useful background information, since how foreign languages (and which foreign languages, if any) are studied varies a lot between countries.

For example you are legally required to learn one foreign language in my country, since we have two official languages and everyone needs to speak both, so you’ll start studying the one you don’t speak latest when you are 13 years old. Majority of people also learn English and one or two additional languages. The first language (whether the other official one or a foreign language) is started at the age of 9, the second at 10 and the third one at 13. All three are studied as mandatory until you are 15 (technically you can get out of studying a foreign language you have already started learning if your parents have the energy to fight your school over it – the other official language is mandatory, though).

Continuing learning the second official language is still mandatory in high school so you learn it for another three to four years. You can additionally pick other languages in high school and university or continue learning the languages you started in elementary school.

Summa summarum: you will learn at least one foreign language for at least 9 to 10 years. Most learn at least two additional languages for several years.

The reason I’m taking Japanese at the moment is honestly pretty silly,

Don’t say so: no reason to learn a new language is “silly”. You will of course get the usual “But however will it be useful for your career???” questions, but just ignore them – not everything needs to be a tool and we are allowed to have hobbies that don’t instantly turn into money.

You have taken on a difficult task to learn a language that is so different from your native language and whether you ever actually need it for anything or become fluent is ultimately meaningless: the fact itself that you stick with it for however long you decide to learn it is commendable.

Best of luck with Japanese! Don’t let the vocabulary and kanji feel too daunting – you can do it!

Verily Baroque
Verily Baroque
4 years ago

Hey good news: we don’t seem to have a word-limit for the comments. “:D”

Also, I guess I should change my nick to “Enter the Verbose” if this trend continues…

Leda Atomica
Leda Atomica
4 years ago

Verily Baroque, excellent post! As I hail from the same country as you do, I started English at 9 (some friends chose Swedish instead, as it was regarded very useful in the 90’s as an international language, though nowadays we regard it useful as a domestic langugae), and German at 10. When I went to Spain to study Spanish when I was 16 I had absolutely no use for my English but did very well in German with the locals.

The languages regarded as useful vary, and it has a lot to do with local interests.

Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
Imaginary Petal (formerly dhag85, trying out pronouns - they/their)
4 years ago

Arabic can get you a long way in large parts of the world.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ IP

Arabic can get you a long way in large parts of the world.

Arabia for a start!

EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

Arabic can get you a long way in large parts of the world.

I was once asked to help a friend research a project about a fictional agency which went around the world investigating alien contacts. It turns out that if you want a language which allows you to walk into a village in any given random spot on earth and communicate with at least somebody in town, Arabic (specially Classical Arabic) should be your go-to.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

I’m going to try to post the rest tonight, I’m doing some holiday stuff with my wife. I apologize for underestimating the amount of time that it would take but it’s a complicated matter trying to pull out the information and organize it into this form. While this is a skill I have been working on for two decades it’s only the last couple of years that I have been consciously trying to treat it like this. On top of that at least a part of it is enabled by Tourette’s Syndrome related language sensitivity. It’s comparable the sensory hypersensitivity that people with autism experience except that it’s at a different level of cognition (like two “flavors” of a category).

@Leda Atomica
Thank you! I have to make sure though, did you mean 5-7 or where I talked about how it looks like physical conflict? The analogy to grappling matches on more than one dimension, and it’s likely the case that the same system we use for physical conflict also works for social conflict. I try to harmonize this stuff with what I read in brain science.

@Kat
Thank you!
It’s interesting because when I started taking what I learned about privilege from others seriously I started seeing patterns that can’t be unseen. It’s tricky to do right but I think that privilege can be used ethically when it comes to seeing the things that were previously invisible. Many of those little differences in behavior, attitude and communication that I have done unconsciously in are now patterns that I am consciously aware of and that means I can choose how to use them. This includes undermining and negating them in social situations.

One of those is a divide between rules for “winning” and rules for “being consistent with reality”. When it comes to social justice related conflicts the rules for “winning” are different for the historically dominant group when it comes to how the historically subordinate groups are perceived. Even if the outrage is manufactured by trolls that know what they are doing, it’s worth keeping in mind that they use this outrage because it works on people in their in-group. I have a lot of bookmarked examples of people, mostly white and male, that act outraged and accept one another’s outrage. For example the outrage at the idea of safe zones, outrage at having racist/sexist behavior called out, outrage at tone. It’s part of how the social conflict works. The historically dominant group has an effect on what is considered outrageous and that can take some time to unlearn.

@EJ
I have been very tempted to start a site like that but I have to admit that I am somewhat intimidated by the prospect. One of the things about having an authoritarian personality and trying to manage it can result in some rather specific OCDs. I tend to agonize about the consequences of things relating to all of this and frankly that has been a good thing (google tourettes and rage attacks). But it still makes organizing something like that challenging. I can think of about a dozen things that I would want to control for in such an effort (emphasis on defense, controls to complicate using it to become better at trolling, getting enough perspectives on each “form” to make it accurate, outlining attack/defense/deception/obfuscation properly, avoiding becoming what we hate…).

Any opinions on a place to propose it and encourage constructive criticism of the idea? Even the form is something to think about. Blog with a post for each item? Wiki due to the better ability to create hierarchies for things?

@opposablethumbs
Yeah but like I mentioned above I’ve been agonizing over the details. The idea is one thing, preventing problems associated with disseminating knowledge about textual martial arts is another. I’m willing, but my muses also tend to be my furies.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

14) “Impossible request”: Troll tells you to do something related to what they assert that is not possible based on what they have provided.
Example.
FS tells PI to “get some perspective” which is impossible given the information provided. A perspective requires information to form a picture and at this point (and later) such information is not provided unless FS simply wants PI to do what they say because they say so.

15) “Irrational self-aggrandizing”: Troll makes claims about themselves for to: attempt a strategic increase of reputation, falsely claim authority relevant to an argument and/or hide actual lack of authority from damaged reputation
Example.
This one has a title that is true when it comes to being consistent with reality, but there is a rationale when it comes to social conflict. FS knows (consciously or otherwise) that they are offering nothing but opinion. So in order to increase their reputation they claim that they have expertise and toss up some information that sounds like it might have to do with legal experience. But this is just another unsupported claim and and worth as much as the others. Claims about tracking chan-Trump connections and similar can also be here as well.

16) “Ignore my offense!”: Troll attempts to redirect, distract or assert no responsibility for an offense(s) by different means. Examples include meaningless unintended offense (offense always happens anyway), claims that the offense does not/should not exist, and offense at claims of offense.
Example. The offense still remains and there is little to do in a social justice context but address the offense directly, understand what it is, what it means to the offended, why it happened and how to avoid it.

17) “Humor as a pleasant poison”: The troll attempts to use humor to strategically reduce, redirect or transform negative feelings related to something.
Example.

The narrative that the Legal system failed is just wrong in this case: it failed because there’s no real bite to online harassment and so on. ZQ might state she stopped the case due to reasons X, but it’s actually more useful to address the legal aspects of the case.

As a feminist. As a woman. As a dog owner. (eek).

Humor has a purpose and a big chunk of this is the suppression or transformation of negative emotion (google “Emotional structure of jokes: a corpus-based investigation” for an interesting paper). Note that this joke tried to reduce the tension associated with the trauma from online harassment.

We don’t want to do that unless it involves helping a victim (and even then only if they are ok with it). It’s informative to see that FS first denied the pain associated with online harassment, and then tried to shift associated discomfort away from that.

EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

@Brony:
I think the best form would be a series of posts on wordpress- or tumblr-like framework, with a front page that acts as a table of contents linking directly to each. That’ll be easy to add content to but also easy for casual viewers to engage with and/or link to.

Brony, Social Justice Cenobite

@EJ
Yeah I think I want to do this.

After some introspection I think I know why I’m hesitant in more detail. A critical reason for why I can even tear apart argument like this is because of a lot of effort to understand how and why they should be torn apart based on the perspectives and experiences of non-white, male, cis people. If I were to do this I need to have a session where I propose the idea and I get others to tell me what they need from such a resource so I can design and organize it right.

One of the biggest ways an ally can fail is to fight for their reasons and not the reasons of the people they want to help. While there will be a lot of general human shapes to how these things work, the reason I can see them is because I’m essentially consciously aware of how these techniques have been applied to different minority groups and finding common denominators between them. Such a site has to have a social justice focus.

Do you think that this would be an acceptable activity in one of the open threads (I’ll email David but I’m curious about thoughts here)?

Does anyone have any comments so far?

EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

You asked for opinions so let me give you mine:

Trolling (as distinct from harassment, which confusingly is often called that) is a silencing tactic. It works by crowding out good-faith communication, and by making good-faith communicators waste enormous amounts of time and energy engaging with a person who isn’t actually listening. It works because the total energy that trolls have available to them for trolling is greater than the total energy that good-faith people have available for response. Trolling is Gresham’s Law of communication, if you will.

Anything that can be done to make this equation more balanced is inherently a social justice focused activity because it prevents soft voices from being crowded out by bad-faith communication. If you teach people to recognise trolling and enable them to respond to it in a brief and dismissive manner rather than expending enormous energy on it, then you have empowered their voices.

The power of such a method is that, unlike many other things which are supposed to empower minority voices, it can’t easily be turned around and used to uphold the status quo because disempowered voices are saying things that are genuinely heartfelt and have not been said before, and thus will not fall within a dictionary of common troll tactics.

Therefore:
– It needs to be written in accessible language (that is, not by wordy white cis male people like ourselves.)
– It needs to have wide categories rather than narrow ones, so people can easily remember them.
– It needs to be written in a funny manner, so people will read it, recommend it and remember it.
– It needs to ridicule trolls, so that people feel embarrassed to be seen to be making the arguments contained within it.
– ETA: It needs to be apolitical insofar as is possible, so as not to alienate people who agree with 90% of it but not the remainder. For example, I am a pacifist, but I would try to avoid mentioning violence negatively within such a context so as to avoid making the resource inaccessible to underprivileged people who do not have the luxury of pacifism.

1 8 9 10