When someone repeats an argument that has been proven false /badly argued many times before, but keeps repeating it in hopes of drowning out opposition or derailing a thread. Yet not disruptive enough to get banned on forums, as it wraps itself in non-hostile, nicely written sentences.
How exactly do moderators deal with this kind of behaviour?
sealioning ?
This one I’ve always been wary of. I studied philosophy so I know a bit about arguments and sealioning is unusual because it can only really take place over the internet where someone is asking questions in bad faith and you can’t 100% call them out because you don’t know their identity for sure. Firstly I don’t like the idea that questions can be bad faith - especially seemingly trivial or obvious ones - since that goes against the Socratic method of questioning all your beliefs/shibboleths. Secondly, it is so context dependent that I think it is hard to universalise it like you can do with other fallacies like false dilemma (everyone is either a tequila or a whisky person, etc.)
Actually it’s quite funny, if you take a broad interpretation of sealioning that does not involve the internet, Ancient Athens sentenced Socrates to death for “sealioning” in 400BC lol.
Well, sealions do go barefoot, even in winter.
Sea lioning is pretending to be interested in a reasonable discussion when you’re really looking to wind someone up until they lose their temper.
Maybe OP was meta-posting