Hi Sup Forums

Hi Sup Forums.

How do you tell the difference between someone who honestly disagrees with you in the interest of debate and a simple shill?

I mean, you can tell, right?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law
democrats-intelligence.house.gov/hpsci-11-1/
nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Nope, Poe’s law

If their arguments are irrational, if they change the subject, if they make many ad hom attacks, they're shills.

If they lay out their premises so you can challenge those premises and use logic to tie the premises together into a conclusion, they're not shills. Soros can't afford that level of propaganda.

Well yeah, but in OP's case, being an anarchist, he can pretty much be assured that everyone genuinely thinks he's a kid or a moron.

this

>hi Sup Forums
the shill is trying to out shill by pretending to shill by shilling but hes not a shill just trying to have an honest confirsation by talking about shills because thats all a shill can do by a shill you fuckin shill

Yes I can tell the differwnce between a retard and a kike.

I only chose this at random so you wouldn't see my meme country, but have at it.

It's getting harder now that people are retarded.

They are one and the same for the purpose of espousing your talking points via the Socratic method.

I'd say 99% of BLM flags on this board are trolls and not remotely black.

Only Jews use porn for attention like op

If they are on this website, they are fucking with you.

Read the wiki page on Poe's law if you want actual advice on this, disregard what people on Sup Forums tell you.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law

>Poe's law is an adage of Internet culture stating that, without a clear indicator of the author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views so obviously exaggerated that it cannot be mistaken by some readers or viewers as a sincere expression of the parodied views.

"The original statement of the adage, by Nathan Poe, was:"
>Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.

"As early as 1983, Jerry Schwarz, in a post on Usenet, wrote:"
>Avoid sarcasm and facetious remarks.
>Without the voice inflection and body language of personal communication these are easily misinterpreted. A sideways smile, :-), has become widely accepted on the net as an indication that "I'm only kidding". If you submit a satiric item without this symbol, no matter how obvious the satire is to you, do not be surprised if people take it seriously.

You aren't going to get any sideways smiles on here. It leads to ignorant people adopting fringe views because of sarcastic users posting comically unsound views, and people with legitimately unsound views posting their backwards ideology being supported by people who are making fun of them.

You can't know if someone is joking or not unless they are in person. The best solution is to quit this website, or take everything on here as bogus.

Follow the last words of Hassan Sabbah:
>Nothing is true, Everything is Permitted.

Shills are good for practicing arguments. This is why Sup Forumsacks are getting very very good at converting leftist via arguing.

Everyone is a pedo facilitator shill until they gas a (((pedofiend)))

Any community that gets it's laughs by pretending to be fools, will inevitably be overrun by fools who mistakenly believe to be in good company.

Here, I'll point some out

legit poster

legit poster

legit poster making fun of you

legit poster wasting their time

legit poster trolling you

idiot

bait

wisest words here

legit poster

if they mention jews, kikes, shills and don't offer anything of substance, don't give them a (you)

yep, why would BLM get on here other than for laughs? They aren't going to convince anyone of anything

if they mention jews, kikes, shills and don't offer anything of substance, don't give them a (you)

if they are legit shills (which is super unlikely honestly) their arguments are probably going to be things that give you a knee jerk or emotional reaction without too much logic. like this poster right here probably has some decent points and a reasonable person would be able to have a dialog with them.

this is the true shill example.
>Everyone is a pedo facilitator shill until they gas a (((pedofiend)))
If you heard a real person say this in a debate would you take them seriously?

Also watch the replies I get. Anyone who calls me a pedo shill facilitator gas the kikes race war now 1488 civic nationalist helicopter ride rhodesia short short doesn't deserve a reply and you can write them off as a shill

The replies that call me a retard for my flag, the ones that have legit criticism, or the ones who just mock me are likely real people.

This guy summed it up.

Leftist shills are wikipedia scholars. They base their arguments on platitudes and a few factoids they regurgitate from their preferred media outlets. They like "the idea" of higher learning, scientific method and debate but lack the motivation to actually become skilled.

You will notice a lack of statistics, historical context or critical analysis when debating shills.

>Sup Forums eternally BTFO
>explain this Sup Forums
These are two sure fire ways to spot a shill on the spot.

Basically, if the only argument they have is calling you a Jew or some other ad hominem, or if they rely completely on emotional arguments, then they are probably a shill or an idiot.

Fuck off lad, if I knew I wouldn't tell you

You guilty

"BBBBRRRRAAAAPPPP"

BRRAAAAAAAAAP

While i agree with most your post, i think you may be confused by the terms shill and shit poster. Out of all the posts you classified as either legit or shill the only one you identified as a shill was clearly a shit poster, not a shill. Do you really think someone is paid to make those kinds of posts? I certainly don't believe that. You are correct in your assessment that the poster brings nothing to the debate and it isn't possible to have a real dialogue with someone like that, but that doesn't mean they are shill. They're just an edgy shit poster.

It's easy
Meme flags
And provocative OP images

Shit the fuck up shill

BRAP BRAP BRAP

What am I?

Does it matter?
If they act brain dead then they might as well be.

no one here can tell, not only is your idea lost on them op, but they don't even realize when someone they disagree with they call a shill is the same dude they called fpbp in another thread.

Anonymity has its uses, and its limits.
absolute support of confirmation bias falls into the later

>They're just an edgy shit poster.

and believe it or not, there are non-edgy shit posters. When I do that I almost always get called a shill. Granted they are probably shitposting as well, but this place seems to have some people who believe all the dogma. Like the ones who think every fucking happening is a false flag.

A faggot

Well, I know you're a leaf....

>if they are legit shills (which is super unlikely honestly)

You lost me here. David Brock got ~$40M to shill social media. That buys a LOT of shilling, and his presence is large on Sup Forums. Not to mention other orgs like JIDF (who are pretty easy to spot desu).

yeah probably better to say shitposter than shill, that's my bad.

I mean, here are some legit examples of shill ads paid for by Internet Research Agency. I don't think I could honestly tell the difference between a real ad and one of these, the main thing that is identifiable to me in that sense is they target existing fissures in society and attempt to widen them.

democrats-intelligence.house.gov/hpsci-11-1/

>pro texas secession


It's really hard to know because the things they focus on are real issues, like how they organized a "not my president rally". Tons of real life liberals I know were legitimately upset and organized their own events independently. Same thing for conservatives, counterprotests were also organized by shills.

I would amend my statement to say "If they don't add anything, they are a shitposter. If they are trying to widen gulfs in society, they are likely a shill". How would you add to that?

you can't due to anonymity.
I've made thought out posts before and get called a shill by 2 posters in a row and nothing gets discussed. This board sucks now but here forever...

You've got a point, $40 million is a lot of money. I admit I don't know alot about David Brock's shilling, I read a good bit about IRA/Russian Troll Farms. From what I understand so far they spent 10 times as much money learning what to what to shill about rather than actual shilling.

I had a thread last night talking about how we would troll Russians on vkontakte and Russian sites, and it was abundantly clear that the Americans interested in such lulz either had no idea what was going on in Russia, what Russians would even get upset about (you would be surprised). Next, it's so difficult to effectively communicate your message in such a way that it isn't immediately identified as being foreign/subversive/etc. If it's really good shilling I don't think we could tell until it already had it's effect.

What do you think?

I think you misunderstand. Everyone who disagrees with you is a shill.

which is why mods are paid so well

Shills got tired of being dismissed as shills and in their efforts to absorb and integrate board culture have begun to call anyone who disagrees with them a shill. Its actually a smart move by them because as the term gets thrown around all day everyday it loses some of its meaning.

Sup Forums is generally a terrible place to have a debate. It devolves into shitposting really quickly.

Sup Forums should be taken as pretty much Sup Forums with a theme. Why /bant/ exists is still a mystery to me since half the posts here are just shitting on another user's flag anyways.

shills post titty and ass pics
next question
shill
nice poisoning the well

Check their flag

This

source?

If anything, Sup Forums is a place that doesn't even need shills. Sup Forums is so paranoid about them that they are just blinded to 90% of the nuances of any problem.

BRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP

It doesn't matter. Often the shills convince themselves they are right anyways

The addition of /bant/ was such a fucking joke. I might even be in favor of it if it were implemented properly. I will see threads that are interesting and loosely related to politics get moved to /bant/, while they leave blacked/bbc threads and all sorts of other non-political threads. I had suspected the mods were compromised for a while but after /bant/ it became painfully obvious.

Can I have some sauce tho

And that's different from the rest of Sup Forums how?

>What do you think?

Tbh, I haven't thought it through as deeply as you have. I see a lot of shilling as, essentially, tripping up and distracting and confusing a proven force - "weaponized autism." In other words, with a lot of shilling, the shill is not even particularly concerned with being a perfect spy, so to speak, with a perfect cover. They just want to create that One-Post-by-this-ID bait thread that maxes out at 300+ posts. And I think they've had some success on this front, although it's hard to quantify it; it's hard to quantify things that *might have* but didn't happen (i.e., if all the distraction shilling for the past year was subtracted, would Sup Forums have achieved things which, in the event, it didn't? ...hard to say. maybe there was a great seed of an idea in some thread that never got traction... that died like a sperm that never reached the egg).

Most of it is trolling. The disagreements among actual posters aren’t really that huge for the most part. Actual shills I don’t believe are that common day to day, but there have been a dozen times or so in the last couple years where Sup Forums has been fucking lambasted by shilling for like 24-72 hours straight. I’m not just talking about sleepyposting or nuclear codes, but outright spam/interracial porn/msm “sourcing”/etc. that kind of stuff convinced me that shills actually do come here

I can always tell who’s a newfag though

Yes. The way you can tell is by lurking moar

t. jealous white boy who can't believe white women are having sex with black men

There are three kinds of posters, and two out of three are interchangeable.
There are legit posters who engage in honest conversation, there are shills who use jewry slimy tactics to push their political agenda and then there are idiots who have fallen for jewry and are just useful idiots for the shills. The last two are practically the same, you can alternate between calling them idiots and calling them shills. Whether or not you called them the right thing depends on how much Sup Forums is being flooded with shills.

These are the characteristics of a shill
>completely unreasonable, doesn't listen to anything, trying to talk to them is like talking to a chat bot and getting canned responses from them
>they have dozens of ''memes'' of unknown origin like they've been made by a small group in a discord server
>obvious proxy switching and a lot of 1 post by this ID, the shill makes a few posts and changes proxy to keep shitposting, they create the illusion that a thread is being swarmed by leftists
>entire board is being flooded by people who repeat the same exact talking points as the suspected shill
There's just one thing a person needs to do to not look like a shill - engage in actual conversation. Even if someone is wrong and retarded, if they can actually talk to you then they are not a shill, or at least not part of any shill campaign than I've seen.

>memeflag
>literal shit post
>pretends like he doesn't know about the statistics that prove him wrong
Have a (You) for your "effort"

how do you explain the pic

>cherrypicking pictures
Can't really expect much from memeflaggers

>There's just one thing a person needs to do to not look like a shill - engage in actual conversation. Even if someone is wrong and retarded, if they can actually talk to you then they are not a shill, or at least not part of any shill campaign than I've seen.

I think there is sometimes an exception to this, where shills will engage in a dialogue. I recall when #SpiritCooking broke a few days before the election, there was a very determined group of posters who sought to knock that down, and to argue that it was a waste of time to push that meme / hashtag. I'm certain those posters were shilled. I see them as sort of the high-end shills, who probably ordinarily post in venues like The Atlantic or the NYT or Wapo, and who are trundled into the ghetto of Sup Forums only for certain special occasions when a really dangerous meme is threatening to get out of hand and go viral.

nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/
until you're ready to kill people and take their guns FUCK OFF

zoophilia, some people have it