Reponses are rarely for the op. They’re always for the crowd. you can let them spout unchallenged and impart the illusion of legitimacy and acceptability, try to ‘reason’ with bad faith and supply their own arguments… or just go full diogenes. Last one is preferable
The problem with that approach is that when they ask that question, they’re performing for an audience. An audience that is as-yet undecided. If you’re outwardly rude to them, that audience is more likely to think “oh wow, this person’s fans are arseholes, maybe the accusations [though the specifics of the accusations haven’t been made clear] are correct”. So IMO it’s better to just prod them into revealing that they, in fact, are the arseholes, and just let that sit. Keep focused and don’t allow yourself to get distracted by unrelated points that they will inevitably try to bait you with.
Reponses are rarely for the op. They’re always for the crowd. you can let them spout unchallenged and impart the illusion of legitimacy and acceptability, try to ‘reason’ with bad faith and supply their own arguments… or just go full diogenes. Last one is preferable
The problem with that approach is that when they ask that question, they’re performing for an audience. An audience that is as-yet undecided. If you’re outwardly rude to them, that audience is more likely to think “oh wow, this person’s fans are arseholes, maybe the accusations [though the specifics of the accusations haven’t been made clear] are correct”. So IMO it’s better to just prod them into revealing that they, in fact, are the arseholes, and just let that sit. Keep focused and don’t allow yourself to get distracted by unrelated points that they will inevitably try to bait you with.