The technique is called the troll’s parry. Consider it a form of rhetorical entrapment. The way it works is simple. First, someone shares something disagreeable. The victim sees this, and expresses an issue with it. Perhaps at first it’s hedged, a mere quibble (all the better if it is), but what matters is that by disagreeing, they invite counter‍-​rebuttals. The stage has been set for the argument to come.

As is the rule with debates, it escalates. The back and forth grows contentious, inflammatory. The victim sees how much pushback this is getting, realizes people really don’t understand what they’re saying, and begins to write longer and longer posts clarifying their stance. This is how you know the parry is soon applicable.

The right time to perform the technique varies (I would call it a matter of taste) but it serves excellently as a fallback, your trump card, the perfect escape route for when you have nothing left to dispute the victim’s diatribe, or at least don’t care to.

When the moment comes, you’re all set to deliver a devastating ad hominem: it’s not that deep. Why are you getting so worked up about this? Why are you filling this funny meme chat with so many words? Why are you so invested, so argumentative, about a matter this trifling?

What makes it so effective is that often enough, the victim can’t even deny it. They look back at where this all started, and it was minor. Maybe it was all a misunderstanding, but the argument had sustained itself on deeper or tangential disagreements.

Now, of course, one can claim hypocrisy; only two can tango, and every round of that back and forth required someone invested enough to reply to the victim. But this is scarcely a weakness: “no u” is a famously ineffective defense, almost never as effective as being the first to lob the accusation.

That’s all it takes. Bait, then blame them for falling for it. Master the troll’s parry and it will serve you well; in my experience, few have any answer to the strategy.

Will it win you any debates? Will it change minds? Well, it’ll discredit your interlocutor and secure you a swift exit. I find for many, that’s all they need.