Has anyone else noticed the amount of Rage Baits posts lately?
Normally posted from new accounts.
Is that the new Trend? Or is the same person creating a new account after they get banned?
BTW I am NOT talking of the historical debates or the standard complaints about new DLC or changes, those are to be expected.
IDK about rage bait per se, but quite a few new forumers (within the last 6 months or so) have come across as unusually aggressive or unhinged.
But beyond that, forum quality seems mostly normal.
Maybe is just that, I hope you are correct, thank you.
I think when you construct a new term you should at least try to express what’s meant with it.
No necessary, at least I don’t think so, but lately instead of the usual debates, some people just want to argue, even contradicting themselves and then try to gaslight anyone who point it out
Some of those discussions end up being close by the monitors.
I hope my reply to @Hzdrafxx explained a little bit better what I meant.
However, if you have not seeing, that’s ok, it could be that is not a big deal.
Rage bait is not a new term as usually refers to posts written with the intention of provoking a(n angry) reaction from others. So, to put it more simply, a post ‘baits’ people into an angry response.
So it’s just provocation?
But without acknowledging that for provocation there are always 2 sides involved. The provocateur and the provocated.
Seems like someone who creatse these new terms tries to shift the responsibility completely to the side of the provocers. But it’s not. The most provocations I see - aksi here - that lead to rage are actually mostly depending on the perceiving end. I don’t want to say in general the perceiving end has a higher responsibility, but alone the term “provocation” implies that generally the provocateur isn’t acting from a position of power. If it was from a postion of power, it would use the term “herassment”.
As far I’m concerned observing provocation across the board it’s usually from a (often self-put in) subordinate position trying to get some kind of response that feels like having at least a bit of power of ther provoced.
And on the other end we often have people who have the attitude in acting like as if they are superordinate and influential, who let themselves easily provoced because there is no such thing in this forum. So they feel like they have to fight back when they feel someone challenging that “position” (which is actually the natural concept of provocation when you eg observe apes).
And the act of being easily provoced usually is a sign that the provoked position is in danger to be lost. If it wasn’t there would be absolutely no reason to be that easily provoked.
And that’s why I like to use the tradidtional Term of proocation as for me it is very clear, that both sides have a responsibility here and I’m not willing to give in an attempt that only one side would be responsible.
Yes, here are provocateurs. But most people here don’t let themselves provocated that easily. It’s only a few people who seemingly have no chill that overreact. And they need to learn not to be provoced that easy.
Though I have to say in my eyes it already has become better There were times where every little out of “normal” behaviour led to shitstorms and for me it looks this time is over, so I see a development in the right direction.
And the least the community let itself be easily provoked the least “rage farmers” are attracted to this forum cause they don’t get the response they’re looking for.
I appreciate your explanation.
That is why I was asking the question.
If is just me who notice that, then I may be wrong, and for the good of this lobby, I would be glad to know that is the case.
Thank you for your insight on the matter.
Yes, and it’s also easier said than done.
It’s not shifting the responsibility to the provokers, it’s simply describing a style of posting, nothing else. It’s also a quick and convenient way of telling others not to fall to the provocations.
For example, OP is asking about their perceived influx of rage bait type posts lately. Trying to say ‘anger-provoking posts’ just feels a little clumsy. Anyway - this is not a new term, it’s been part of the internet lexicon since the very early days of the internet.