I see 2 main types of shills. I’m sure there are more:
-
Shills that strait up attack us. Insult, bully, and all round try to discourage and demoralize.
-
Shills that infiltrate, pretend to be one of us, but subvert the movement by spreading disinfo, and bait gullible people to fall for stupid fake stories. They weaponized our confirmation bias.
Are there terms for these different behaviours? I think it would be helpful to have terminology to distinguish between them.
Can you think of any other prominent forms of shilling that we should be looking out for?
So you don’t fall for one of their traps. It’s very easy to do. You need to know what to watch out for.
Respectful disagree.
They have no traps. They have hurty words.
They are the equivalent of a fart in a hurricane.
They are also painfully obvious, so I’m fine to keep them all lumped in together.
They bury relevant information, the whole point of this forum.
Well couldn’t handshakes be easily sorted by Controversial and kept in one place until they show their true colors? Wouldn’t that help?
Weird. I don’t know all the ins and outs of why that might or might not be a good idea, but something to think about at least.
Great thing is that as far as shills are discussed, you can do you, and vice versa.
One thing we can all agree on, is whoever the shill, they are not a real woman.
If you really wanted to inflict damage on the movement you would start off be following along, agreeing with people, and establishing some cred within the community.
Then you can slowly inject falsehoods, and masquerade them as legitimate digs. People are reeeeaaalllly gullible when they see things that confirm their bias.
Before long, you can have non handshake accounts steering the community towards dead ends, or leading people down a false rabbit hole as a distraction, or to discredit the validly of the movement as a whole.
If you think that sounds far fetched, keep in mind that you presumably believe in “the plan”. Far stranger things have happened.