Engaging with bait Anonymous 209333
I think "baiting" is one of the internet concept that I could never wrap my head around because it's a lose/lose situation in my eyes because if you reply then "you've been tricked into replying" and that's a bad thing apparently and if you don't then you're allowing the baiter to speak their fucked up ideologies into existence under the guise of irony while only receiving positive engegment from similar minded people. is ignoring someone who is balantly spreading misinformation/hateful ideologies the correct thing to do? So what if the poster's intention is to get a raise out of people? why would that matter at all when it hardly translate or make any difference over the reality or the consequences of their words?
You could just try to report it and hope that jannies sweep it up, otherwise don't engage. Usually baiters do what they do because it's funny to get people worked up and not because they genuinely believe in their position.
>>209334> Usually baiters do what they do because it's funny to get people worked up and not because they genuinely believe in their position.
Absolutely not! that's what they want you to think… "bait" is just them testing the waters on what's acceptable to say on the short term, on the long term it works to push moral boundaries and normalize psychopathic thoughts and behaviors.
what a retarded take please exit imageboards and go argue on twitter
I have this sinking feeling that OP is pulling a bait-ception gayops
>>209337>i know an anonymous stranger's intentions better than they do
they readily admit they don't believe something and adopt random contradictory 'beliefs' and memes at different times in order to get people worked up or for attention. like you are doing with this retardation.
Can you post an example of what you think is bait and why?
is bait. If you see a post that sounds overdramatic, hysterical, and/or makes a hyperbolic, absolutist claim>Absolutely not!
and (for maximum effect) simultaneously insults people who believe the opposite of their viewpoint>it works to push moral boundaries and normalize psychopathic thoughts and behaviors
then nine times out of ten it is going to be bait.
>t. someone who successfully baits often
Yeah I made an educated assumption from my own observations over the years but I also said that the intention does not
matter. It doesn't matter if they mean it or not because the result will be the same in how it affects people's perceptions (including the ironic baiter him/herself) and public conversation>>209348
I have purposely avoided giving examples or talking about anything in particular because I don't want the thread to be derailed into whatever specific topic I mentioned. I am sure that If you have been on social media or imageboards for a while you must have seen plenty of these "bait" posts or people replying to controversial statements with "this is bait" etc…>>209349
not necessarily. Actually a lot of the time, the "bait" in question sounds very sincere and matter-of-fact, which is why I find it very confusing that the conversation it simply generates is seen as "people taking the bait"
You're assuming the baiter cares or even has any ideology to spread. It is a question of reward. If you reward someone with attention/butthurt for their bait, they'll keep posting it and the thing you didn't want to spread will spread like wild fire.
but it's going to spread anyway from receiving positive attention by attracting people who unironically take such a position.
If it only elicits a positive response and not ragey butthurt, then it isn't bait. It sound more like you have a problem with people having opinions that differ from yours.
If bait is unsuccessful, it won't spread. If it is, it will spread. Apart from that, people will have opinions you find horrendous but they'll keep having them no matter what you do. Simple as.
>>209356>If it only elicits a positive response and not ragey butthurt, then it isn't bait.
That makes no sense.
>>209356>If it only elicits a positive response and not ragey butthurt, then it isn't bait.
Exactly, it's shrodinger's bait depending on how people react to it, which is why whenever the baiter (or not?) is being ironic or not doesn't matter.>It sound more like you have a problem with people having opinions that differ from yours.
It depends but usually yes, that's generally why I get into discussion and try to sway people into my side… > people will have opinions you find horrendous but they'll keep having them no matter what you do
Agreed, which is why I'm concerned with it reaching less opinionated people who are more malleable.
How is it bait then? Who is it baiting? If literally no one is getting mad about it, it's not bait, at least not successful bait, which is what matters in the end.
Whether other people agree with it or not is not something you can control.>>209359
Well, then you're out of luck. Brainlets abound and it's a dog-eat-dog world where the side that successfully manipulates the biggest mass of brainlets is rewarded. I don't see a way for you to change that unless you go full fascist and control communication to your liking.
Racebait on lolcow. You know those posts that are close to breaking the rules but they're vague enough not to? But at the same time they're bold enough to rile people up. Short and no real, fleshed out arguments. Responders write essays and get banned.
>>209352>the "bait" in question sounds very sincere and matter-of-fact
Probably because of Poe's law. Whenever I leave bait I usually take an actual position (e.g. AI is good! Stop being so angry!) and make it more extreme to the point that it might offend people. To me, it looks like obvious bait, but people will take the bait every time. Usually, if some anon posts an extreme opinion and writes it in a somewhat hostile/demeaning attitude, then there's a reasonable chance that it's bait.
If someone makes a post "the weather is so nice today" and the other anons get pissed of because of it, is it bait?
Samefag from >>209361
here just want to add>Exactly, it's shrodinger's bait depending on how people react to it, which is why whenever the baiter (or not?) is being ironic or not doesn't matter
I agree with this in principle, it's just that the reward/motivation part of it is also important. I think it's a matter of cost/benefit. The cost of responding is taking the bait and rewarding the baiter, thus giving incentive to continue baiting, the benefit would be to disprove a flawed argument. Usually, like >>209363
says, you'd be able to identify obvious bait by posts that are unreasonably extreme or with low quality/low effort. It makes no sense to respond seriously to those because there is little benefit and a high cost.
Why would the other anons be pissed about it? It depends on the context. Is it posted in an some weather-haters-only imageboard? Then yes, it's bait. It's about whether the expected response will be rage/outrage. People don't get butthurt out of nowhere.
Samefag but again bait can sometimes be a lot more nuanced than this—you need to know your audience. Just pick any topic that is controversial to the user base and make an absolutist claim—sometimes the opinion is so controversial that you don't even need to come off as hostile. Of course, if your target is more educated (say the 'dumbass shit' thread on lc vs. /r/neoliberal) you'll need to put in more effort to disguise yourself. Good bait can usually lead to hours of thread derailment and incite other people to infight. Rule of thumb is to never argue over the internet because it's a waste of time and you won't win anyway—this is, coincidentally, a good heuristic for avoiding bait.
It honestly doesn't look that fun.
Arguing all the time isn't "fun" either, and the only thing it achieves is the majority dictating what can be talked about without causing shitstorms, leading to every single space becoming exactly the same. Sometimes you just want to talk about something with people who share a minimum set of beliefs with you without having to explain yourself over and over. That's why people should avoid going into threads they know will make them mad. Pic related.
>>209374>It honestly doesn't look that fun.
I feel the same, it's why I find it hard to believe that getting attention from baiting could be enjoyable if you yourself aren't somewhat personally invested in the topic aswell.
It doesn't if you're the one getting baited, but it's pretty funny watching people clearly investing a considerable amount of their time to being right and then proceeding to have nuclear meltdowns over a troll post. But you're right in that it gets boring after a while and the tough part is figuring out how to end the argument without looking like you gave up
Baiting also helps you get ammo against your opponents too. Like saying "the quiet part out loud". It's used in IRL politics all the time.
Well, you baited yourself by being dependent of others opinions to enjoy yourself.
>>209333>is ignoring someone who is balantly spreading misinformation/hateful ideologies the correct thing to do?
if you make it your duty to call out people saying wrong/hateful things on the internet you will drive yourself crazy. if you find yourself needing to respond, do what i do and just write "no." and move on and don't look if you got a reply, you won and it's time to do something else.
Whatever helps you sleep at night.
I personally like engaging with bait. The initial baiter has reached out to me so he's already emotionally invested and like you would expect he then proceeds to give a huge reaction.
Engagement unfortunately invites more baiting so I abstain from it where I value the community more than brief entertainment for myself, like on cc. The whole community needs to agree on it though and cc is probably the best instance of that that I've seen, so many moid-dominated communities just can't give it a rest and keep engaging and entertaining shit they don't want to see until there's barely anything else left
Inside every baiter is a disappointed sincereposter who didn't get enough attention for their boring opinions.
this. they are personally invested. a lot of baiters are people whose opinions lean a bit
toward what they're baiting with anyway. they're just exaggerating it in a bid to get someone to engage with them.
Absolutely no one on the internet is emotionally detached from the discussion they're in, never forget it.
The internet's pretty cool, huh?
Tbh I just don't care. Like I care somewhat or I wouldn't be replying or engaging with the threads at all but sometimes I just reply and fuck off to go do something else. It's entertainment to talk with people but the same kind of enjoyment you'd get from a television show character getting killed or whatever. It might as well not be real.