this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2026
634 points (96.6% liked)

memes

22019 readers
3261 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

I know this is a meme but I think people look down on internet discussions too much. Obviously it depends on "arguing" type but reddit/lemmy is at least somewhat structured and depending on the community can be good faith and productive. For people who don't live in a big city finding a community to exchange more niche thoughts and opinions (e.g. operating systems, design decisions etc) is incredibly difficult.

I have a related anecdote of being an assistant to older people in IT classes and intellectual starvation is a very big deal. Once people settle down, move further out of the city it's hard to find discussions on their interests without internet comments. The real issue is Facebook groups which are often the only forums available to these people, and they are not fit for scratching this itch for intellectual stimulation as it's design precisely for the opposite of that. This might sound silly, but old people need Lemmy.

[–] late_pessimistic@slrpnk.net 7 points 15 hours ago

Its my crack I can't stop coming back to all while hating every second of it

[–] Frenchgeek@lemmy.ml 10 points 18 hours ago

To be fair, when you try it in person, they're all "Who are you? How did you get in my house? I'm calling the cops!", then it's no fun at all.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 5 points 17 hours ago (2 children)

It’s my favorite hobby.

At this point, every comment on Lemmy is greeted with angry responses who are willfully choosing to ignore the point I was making and try to fight me.

If I say “I like dogs” someone is going to come along and tell me I’m a jerk for not liking cats even though I didn’t say I don’t like cats. That or someone mansplaining dogs to me.

Calm down Lemmy. Take a breather.

[–] BigBoyShuanzee@aussie.zone 3 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

What about birds you heartless monster, you have ruined my day!

It is good fun though.. It's part of the reason I got permabanned from Reddit.. That and criticizing Israel and Nazis.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

i got banned for posting a picture of my cat sitting on the porch.

it made me a bird mass murderer, or something. ban was for inciting violence.

it was in 2021. then i was unbanned a few months later with a DM begging me to buy IPO stock.

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

People like being offended and feeling victimized.

It's a rush and they get addicted to it.

I have a cat and a dog... and a lot of folks will just argue with me on principle or try to make me pick a side. even in real life. or like get in a big stink about if they are purebred or rescue. i have no clue why any of it matters, i guess other than their insecure need to feel validated by getting you to agree with them.

I hate it. It's so stupid and annoying. You can't just like things anymore... anything you enjoy has to 'hurt' someone else and they have to let you know how wrong and bad you are for enjoying it.

I like Cilantro, and I've had internet weirdos tell me that it's able-ist to enjoy it, because my enjoyment of it is some sort of racism against the people for whom it tastes like soap. Or like commentary made at me in the taco line when I order it how it's so gross. It's so ridiculous. I think Pinto beans are disgusting, but I don't feel offended and hurt that other people enjoy them.

[–] W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 hours ago

Please give your furry friend a treat from me and tell them I said hi!

[–] SethTaylor@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago

Oh, I'm about to argue with one right now you little dumbass

[–] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 13 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Of course it was.

They were wrong. How are they going to know they are wrong if no one tells them?

[–] yakko@feddit.uk 3 points 20 hours ago

The ones who know they're wrong bother me even more.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 3 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Hello, fellow stranger online!

[–] FinishingDutch@lemmy.world 8 points 23 hours ago (9 children)

Absolutely. There’s way too many blithering idiots online. We made the web way too accessible to them back in the ‘90’s.

And if idiots don’t get challenged, you run the risk of them thinking they’re actually right. And that’s very, very dangerous.

I will admit the only reason I attempt to verbally correct them is because I don’t have access to a Reaper drone to shove a Flying Ginsu missile up their ass.

[–] SippyCup@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

I mean, evidence shows that having their ideas challenged online tends to entrench people in their ideas more so than it convinces them that they're wrong.

So, while I sympathize with your goals, I think your method is having the opposite effect of your intended outcome.

I say this, knowing it's true, and still doing the arguing online thing anyway.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 6 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

It's not about them it's about the other people that might be influenced by their post.

Online is never an A&B conversation, which is why I usually avoid direct confrontation and just provide well structured, clear information, because I don't really care whether I can convince someone who has made up their mind.

It's about deconstructing the argument with clear digestible information for the dozens of lurkers.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

LOL as if. Literally I will see people with logical responses getting ripped apart because the person they are arguing with just sounds more right and or it fits what people wanted to hear in that specific echo chamber.

Say something cause you want to say it, not cause you are giving yourself points on an invisible scoreboard for people that might not exist.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

I think you may want to reread what I wrote because this is barely related. Feels more like something happened and you're just looking for a vent.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

No its related In that, I dont believe the lurkers are appreciating it like you think they are. And that logical responses are often still beaten by emotional forces. And, getting the high of watching a "nerd" get dunked on is likely more of not all of the counter arguments received perspective when commenting against the perceived right take of a community.

If you are commenting, you are doing it for yourself. Inventing an imaginary person that is receiving your argument other than the person you are talking to is silly and delusional in the truest sense of that word.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

I don't think it's delusional to want to teach people things. When you respectfully deconstruct someone's half truths it can help people understand.

This is not to say that you should take everything seriously or that every person is worth engaging with of course you still have to be selective.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Imagining their existence without proof is though. Teaching people is different then screaming into a black box and relying on faith that it did.

And here we are back at the emotional response overpowering the logical one. If you want to teach actually do it than hoping you are passively doing it.

[–] KindnessIsPunk@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 hours ago

Is your argument that you don't think anyone else reads what people post on social media, and that it has no effect if they do? Respectfully are you insane?

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Evidence isn't what bullies and bigots rely on. It's their feelings of superiority and their justification of violence.

hence why they will never argue with evidence or facts. They will just insult and harass and threaten.

and if you use the evidence of their own words against them... well get ready to get reported to the mods.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] pyre@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

what was i supposed to do, let people just be wrong online?

[–] TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

could be worse, you could let them merge in front of you in traffic.

[–] SippyCup@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

let... them...?

Is... Is that an option?

[–] Shellofbiomatter@lemmus.org 1 points 17 hours ago

Yes, i was entertained for a while.

[–] hark@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

It's a hobby.

[–] Krauerking@lemy.lol 0 points 16 hours ago

I think debating for fun has killed our ability to communicate as a species. Pushback becomes an ignorable stress since it comes with no real consequence. And it makes every conversation an chance to argue your point as if it must be a part of your identity to be protected at all cost.

I really dislike angry conversation without purpose.

[–] luciferofastora@feddit.org 28 points 1 day ago (4 children)

There's a weird dynamic to arguing online, particularly when it comes to political topics. Most of the time, you won't convince your counterpart. Maybe some point sticks with them later and you'll never know, but either way they're not really the target of the arguments. It's the (potential) audience that the argument is supposed to be for: People less emotionally invested in the conflict may take away something useful from the arguments, people on the fence about an issue might come around to your point, and people sharing your opinion will see that they're not alone and feel affirmed.

Essentially, it's a performance on an public stage for the sake of discourse. Phrased strongly, you don't want "the other side" to dominate the public opinion, so you engage them. In the process, you may hone your own arguments, or you may find them wanting, perhaps even see them start to crack.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›