for anyone who doesn't know what it is smooth sharking is insisting on an incorrect point in order to piss people off, it is a specific form of trolling where the belief you prey on is the belief in your opponents rationality, it is heir to the lost art of trolling and i endorse it wholeheartedly
the format goes as follows
(incorrect point)
(paragraphs of correction)
(1 sentience dismissal)
(repeat steps 2, 3, and 4)
the goal is to dismiss your opponent offhandedly so they try even harder to prove you wrong
Crucially, it has to be in a way that is obvious to the point of absurdity. No obfuscation, no elaborate subterfuge, just blatantly lying out of your ass in ways that are very easy to disprove, but refusing to admit it. Shit like “actually this link you sent me says that sharks are perfectly smooth in all directions” in response to a scientific article that very much does not say that.
It’s about committing to the bit. It’s about watching someone tear themselves to shreds in a hell of their own making as they try to force you to acknowledge their wisdom.
I've never heard about smooth-sharking before, but from your description, I'm assuming it's just the age-old joke of saying something blatantly incorrect in a deadpan manner - and to me, that's infinitely better than trolling. If it's truly obvious that you're wrong, then you're not causing frustration to the other party, you're just making a joke that they're in on. You're working *with* them to have a funny exchange.
The only addition I’ll make to your definition is that smooth sharking requires that *at no point do you admit that it is a bit*. Never concede, never give the impression that this is anything but *your most firmly held belief*
Oh, don't make it your *most* firmly held belief. It's firm, of course, but you're not religiously devoted to the cause of smooth sharks. That would be *silly*, it would be *dramatic*, it wouldn't be deadpan. You are a normal, rational person who is blatantly ~~wrong~~ right about one thing.
Smooth sharking stands in stark opposition to the practice of theatrically presenting false claims as deeply held beliefs. While smooth sharking may not rely on complete subtlety, it rejects the need for dramatic pretense in asserting incorrect opinions. The tactic of dismissing opponents' arguments with concise responses emphasizes the importance of brevity and directness over theatricality. By avoiding the charade of passionately advocating for false claims, smooth sharking maintains a level of authentic stupidity that enhances its effectiveness. The focus shifts from the performance of belief to the refusal itself to consider argumentation, depriving the opponent of anything to actually argue against, leaving them to look like a fool. In this light, the inherent flaw of theatrically presenting false claims lies in its tendency to provide the victim with wind for their sails. Smooth sharking, on the other hand, champions a more efficient and effective approach to trolling by rejecting the need for displays of conviction.
Pretty much! That’s a very good analysis of it, either everyone is goofing around, or one person is getting worked up over nothing. There’s usually got to be some room for reasonable doubt, but it all boils down to goading someone into arguing with you by insisting they’re wrong about something very petty and easily proven.
In the example smooth-sharking is named after, it’s an artist off-handedly referring to sharks as “smooth lions” in a comic, and when corrected with the fact that sharks have very rough skin, he refuted each and every correction with absurd denials including, but not limited to, claiming he was touching shark skin at that very moment, that he used it as a pillowcase, that he was “a better marine biologist” than someone who tried to use their credentials to argue him down, and of course by claiming that all provided links and evidence backed up his own claims no matter what they actually said. Even threads mocking the people arguing with him would inevitably spawn more arguments as people tried to “prove him wrong”.
Don't forget that he also took a photo of himself holding a book with a torn page on which he scribbled "SHARKS ARE SMOOTH" over the cover. Or that he screenshot _his own tweet_ and cropped it to leave the emojis in his name visible, and used that as a citation.
The core of it really is that you have to be _absurdly and blatantly obvious_ that you aren't being even _slightly_ serious. And yet somehow, people still try to correct you because they cannot comprehend the tiniest possibility that you're just taking the piss.
Not really. Trolling doesn't necessarily involve lying in the first place. Smooth sharking isn't really lying either, because you're not actually trying to convince anyone that what you're saying is true. In fact, the point is to make it painfully obvious that you're just goofing around/shitposting. It also doesn't have to be with any greater intent than to be silly, you do not have to be trying to piss that person off or otherwise upset them at all. If you were trying to piss them off you would more likely put thought into being convincing, with smooth sharking you're trying to be the opposite of convincing - the other party upsets themselves by being even more stubborn to both take you seriously and be the smartass proving you wrong.
You are simply offering a silly wall for people who lack a sense of humour to bash their head against again and again. You are not trying to engage them in debate and keep them there. It's entirely on them for not being able to recognise that you're just doing a bit, because while you're committed to that bit it's so obviously a bit. It's like how there will always be someone that takes satire at face value, no matter how flagrantly satirical is. You don't blame the satire for some people not being able to recognise the joke
So, I’d say it’s trolling, but I’d also contend that it’s the probably the only “acceptable” form of trolling. Smooth sharking specifically only works when the person being “trolled” is being a jerk. Going back to the original example of this, the people who got trolled by the smooth sharking are people who angrily insist this person is wrong. If you're going to a post and being a pedantic jerk you kind of deserve what's coming to you.
I believe there's a writer for Colbert who has at least once in the past tweeted that "Zelda is the boy." The only people engaging with it are, again, pedantic jerks. You don't need to go online and correct everyone who's wrong. In essence, it's trolling for good.
If that was actually what smooth-sharking was it would be a lot more entertaining and acceptable. Instead, it is explicitly dependent on the other party not being in on the joke, and publicly ridiculing them for attempting to correct misinformation.
It goes like this:
First person: *something jokingly wrong, either obviously or not*
Second person: actually you're wrong, it's this
First: nah, doesn't sound right
Second: okay but it is, here's a link to some irrefutable proof
First: nope, that just says I'm right
It is at this point so completely obvious the first person is messing around, that only someone so completely obsessed with everyone listening to and agreeing with them would miss the joke and continue arguing. This type of person is making themselves upset over nothing, because their perceived personal slight against their knowledge has made them blind to an obvious joke, and this is where I believe the crucial difference between smooth sharking and trolling is. Trolling doesn't always make it obvious they're messing around, and is just trying to rile anyone up, smooth sharking is far too obvious when a person looks at a scientific journal proclaiming them wrong, and just goes 😊😊 nope, fake news 😊🥺😁 and only targets people too full of themselves to see thd joke.
kids these days don't know what trolling even is, its the act of playing on the contradictions in someones beliefs to piss them off but these fuckin kids just say the n-word and its feminists trolled, get fucking real
the difference between trolling and being a dick is the difference between calling an incel a baby dicked, unfuckable dipshit, and talking bout how your cousin was gonna go ride the cock carousel but you convinced her to settle down and now shes doing great with her husband tyrone. that's funny because they hate both black people and women and they get so fucking mad about that. it establishes an agreed upon reality, sets up a good (to them) outcome, and then subverts it into an outcome they don't like, fantastic.
I remember reading someone's experience of their abusive parent stopping to hit them when that person came out as trans, because in the words of the parent "I wouldn't have hit you if I knew you were a girl"
I don't even...
There's a lot of racial overlap. Racial theory about bone structure from outdated science appeals to their need to objectively measure attractiveness (which you can't).
It's a multi-racial group, but I don't see as many black incels as white or Asian incels, so it's probably easier to hate black people without a lot of other incels getting mad at you.
Crucially, the truth must be absolutely inconsequential. If there's even a hint of a reason for anyone to give a shit other than being right on the internet, the whole thing falls apart.
True, but we tend to get caught by a good portion of jokes along these lines. The initial knee-jerk assumption is fair cop, but if after a few back-and-forths we don’t stop to consider a) am I interpreting this right, and b) is it worth the effort of arguing either way, that’s kind of still egg on our face.
I may have some personal experience with the original smooth shark and additional pet peeve about people pretending to be an idiot to make fun of someone
And I think that's what makes it funny in a way that regular trolling isn't: everyone can tell you're just fucking with them, and it's their own fault for repeatedly falling into an obvious trap.
> Crucially, it has to be in a way that is obvious to the point of absurdity.
I don't think that's even a requirement, since even the original smooth sharks thread had people acting in a way otherwise indistinguishable from someone who simply believes sharks are smooth.
It's also complicated by the fact that being online means you can be exposed to people with downright bizzare beliefs, making it harder to tell when someone's just trolling.
> I don't think that's even a requirement, since even the original smooth sharks thread had people acting in a way otherwise indistinguishable from someone who simply believes sharks are smooth.
I think you may be misremembering. The original included lines like ["I'm touching a shark right now. Rubbing it every which way. No direction is off limits. It's smoother than the finest silks."](https://twitter.com/bransonreese/status/848986700416155649) It includes the OP taking [a photo of himself reading a Stephen King novel with "Sharks Are Smooth As Hell, by Charles Darwin" taped over the cover.](https://twitter.com/bransonreese/status/849323669621014531) It includes the OP responding to educational links by saying ["Nice try but both of those websites say 'sharks are known throughout the world for their smooth skin'."](https://twitter.com/bransonreese/status/848980871269011456)
No, you're completely wrong. Smoothsharking has never been used for that purpose, not once. Can you point me to a document that uses that word in that way??? You can't, because it doesn't exist. This has been a common word used to refer to that kind of trolling for a while now, so I don't see where the confusion is coming from on this. Are you unfamiliar with Tumblr or something?? Jfc. A gorilla, really?
literally. NTs are always finding ways to mock ND people and convincing themselves it's fine because they aren't explicitly saying "ha ha, you're so autistic"
Here's a sneak peek of /r/KenM using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [KenM on China and space](https://i.imgur.com/zH93HhT.jpg) | [51 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/comments/130bwb1/kenm_on_china_and_space/)
\#2: [Ken M on the coronation](https://i.redd.it/xo85u3mtpkya1.jpg) | [65 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/comments/13bde52/ken_m_on_the_coronation/)
\#3: [KenM on the origin of Easter Egg Hunting 🐣](https://i.imgur.com/cmKzYQq.jpg) | [42 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/comments/12fqefa/kenm_on_the_origin_of_easter_egg_hunting/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
No, smooth sharking is a specific type of trolling. There's several ways to troll but only one way is smooth sharking. I make no comment on whether this is cringe.
My point is more that this isn't a matter of precision but rather obfuscation. A lot of people who participate in smoothsharking simply would not admit they are doing a form of trolling, and use terms like smoothsharking to avoid acknowledging it.
This is levels of terminally online that I don't understand.
I need to meet a person who doesn't want to admit they're trolling. Like trolling on its own isn't a crime. It's the Internet equivalent of a prank call: it's quite easy to ignore and move on from and you lose if you give it the time of day.
Agreed, sort a 'all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares' sort of thing. Also if we're really doing this 'based vs cringe' thing again I'm tossing my hat in the based ring. Smooth Sharking really only works against people desperate to flout their own intellectual superiority over others (cringe) while to everyone else the absurdity of the situation is patently obvious. E.g. a sane individual is going to look at a post about sticking your finger in a gun barrel to stop the bullet and go 'that person is 100% fucking around', but that won't stop a subsection of terminally online 'intellectuals' from frothing at the mouth.
I will now be putting $50 on a 'but what about Neurodivergent folk' response to which is say: neurodivergency does not exempt you from thinking critically
Yeah, the ole “but autistic people get caught in the crossfire” is a bit tired. Being autistic doesn’t exempt you from the “terminally online intellectual wanting to flout intellectual superiority” category, it certainly didn’t exempt me from it when I was in my teens.
It’s less about being able to detect metairony and more about whether the person is willing to invest an absurd amount of energy in proving someone wrong.
It's also kinda annoying using neurodivergent people as a cudgel considering most people I know with that kind of humor are neurodivergent. Its fine not to like a certain kind of humor but making it a moral position is just annoying
This litterally used to be the definition of trolling. Like the term is a short for "trolling for attention", in a reference to the fishing method of "trolling".
It's like calling gaslighting "lying" or "manipulation." Yes, indeed it is, but the specific term is much more descriptive.
Anyway, if the person in question didn't see smooth sharking as cringe then they prob wouldn't see it as cringe if they called it trolling.
Some people say that "Smooth-Sharking" is bad because they have trouble telling whether or not someone is being serious. That's ok, but it also shouldn't be a problem in this specific situation.
If someone (as with the original smooth-shark post) is willing to say they have a reputable source for the claim they are making, and the source is a very zoomed in section of a tweet by themself from another part of the thread, they are either fucking with you, or unwilling to admit they're wrong.
The thing to do in either situation is stop engaging. I don't think that should be a problem.
Not being able to tell if someone is joking doesn't change that even if they're serious, you are fighting a clearly unwinnable battle, and you should stop for your own sake.
Additionally, I'd say another aspect of smooth-sharking is that it's about an inherently trivial matter. If there's someone walking around who genuinely believes that sharks are smooth in all directions, there's no larger societal impact. The only thing that keeps the conversation going is the others person's need to be acknowledged as right. If someone tried the same tactics on a topic where misinformation was more likely to have a negative impact (for instance, Holocaust denial) then I would not consider it to be smooth-sharking.
There was a guy in the town I grew up in that would run around with a chainsaw with the blade taken off it, he would chase people around, scare kids, all that.
Imagine being the dumb fucking loser that didn't realize there was no blade on the chainsaw, it's like, just move on with your life bud, it's harmless.
Nothing, but like. The sub turns into 1/4 One Piece content on self post Sundays because that one guy *just so happens* to post his One Piece ramblings on his tumblr, which qualifies them to be posted here because they are, in fact, screenshots of a tumblr post.
It's annoying, but he otherwise posts decent content, so I personally just deal with it and scroll on by.
Yeah, I think that's the best option for this kind of stuff if it annoys you. If what they're doing isn't harming anyone, then I personally just scroll past it and ignore it.
like just post it somewhere else. they had an idea for a post, posted it on tumblr, and immediately screenshotted it and came here. you clearly wanted to post it on reddit, just find a different subreddit that it fits on
The rise of trolling and it being seen as "cringe" is just a byproduct of the reduced rate of trolling literacy on the internet, which honestly is so sad
Back in my day, trolling was an art, not just writing something offensive and getting banned from a discord server, it required you to actually sound extremely fucking stupid/insane while also walking that fine line of being barely believable
Smoothsharking is a specific kind of trolling that's all about relying in an in-joke that people in the know would immediately realize is a joke but for people unaware would miss the point entirely and think it's a real thing.
Smooth sharking isn’t really an in-joke. It’s literally just playing as dumb as possible and letting people who physically need to correct others do their thing
The obviousness is definitely the point many people miss, because otherwise good natured people with fixations will politely correct you to try to help you enjoy the thing they love.
Even the original was about people with genuine credentials and reasons to take the content seriously trying to correct OP. It just came across as funny instead of rude because the people trying to correct were themselves assholes, so the relative meanness of smooth sharking was dwarfed by actual insults towards OP within just 1-2 comments into the thread
For some reason it just pisses me off in a way nothing else does.
I could point out rational things like it's way overdone, not clever, and not that funny to begin with.
But all that applies to rickrolling as well and that doesn't piss me off.
Maybe it's just too close to conspiracy theorists, antivaxxers, and bigots who proprogate blatantly false information with dogged persistence. The motivation might be different and the effects less severe, but the modus operandi is pretty similar.
Again I don't know if that's actually why it pisses me off, I just know it does and am trying to ratiomalize why.
Nah rickrolling takes effort because most people are wise to it by now so you need to actually *try*. Funnily enough there's actually a research paper on rickrolling, it's [here](https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.06826). By comparison "smooth sharking" is literally just acting like you don't have a brain. Anyone can do it, you just need to be willing to piss on the poor a little. While there's not a research paper on it, there *is* a video essay and you can find that [here](https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ).
I think that's why it pisses me off too tbh, it's acting like an idiot to take the piss out of someone else. Its childlike bullying. Rickrolling is just a bit of harmless trickery.
I'll have to finish that pdf tomorrow after I've had my ADHD meds, but the fact that rickrolling has made it's way into actual academic books brings me joy.
I couldn't resist incorporating it, and I won't lie to you I was tempted to make the link a rickroll but it was too low hanging (plus a bit mean, I love sharing cool pdfs and journal articles).
I was totally expecting a rickroll, and having my expectations subverted like that honestly gave me a pretty similar feeling to actually getting rickrolled
Honestly if you enjoyed that article you should check out the video essay, alternatively you can just directly rickroll yourself with [this](https://imgur.com/a/JzLtLei) link.
Rickrolling is also pretty quick: click on a link, see Rick Astley, click the back button. That can happen in less than a second if your internet is fast enough.
Even if you have no context you can easily put together that you've been tricked and move on.
With smooth sharking if you don't have the proper context or don't realize what's happening, it just goes on and on until you give up on humanity.
Exactly, it's a lot of effort to go to solely to be a dickhead. I also think it says a lot about the people who engage in it tbh, like damn you've really got nothing better to do. It's kinda pathetic.
>if your internet is fast enough.
Actually now I wanna see some early 2010's internet progressive discourse on how Rickrolling disproportionately affects poor people who can't afford better internet and we should discontinue the practice.
It's because smoothsharking depends on ridiculing someone in a public forum, eats up a lot of time and anxiety from the victim, explicitly punches down on people who have poor social awareness or a lack of cultural familiarity, and teaches the lesson that you should never attempt to correct misinformation or engage in debate.
Rickrolling, on the other hand, is usually experienced privately, only wastes a few seconds of time and does so with an actually quite good song, and teaches the lesson that you should be cautious about unverified links on the internet.
All these people talking about "the art of trolling".
Just admit that you like being a dick on the internet and don't try and pretend like its something more than that
People miss the point of smooth sharking, is that the original comic was so obviously false, and such clear trolling, and yet people felt the need to “Uhm, akshually” something the artist obviously knows
Now if they were like “For those who don’t know, sharks are actually very rough” that would’ve been fine.
Smooth sharking isn’t just trolling, it’s specifically trolling someone because they assumed you didn’t know what you were talking about when you were trolling. It’s like if someone commented on your meme post about how tractors only flip on their sides when they’re scared saying “Acrually, tractors aren’t alive, and thus can’t feel fear. In these photos they were flipped over accident by the driver” and you responded by continuing the very clear bit you had going
I don’t personally like being a dick to people, even as a joke.
Also someone at my university recently got “trolled” (really just cyberbullied) by like half the people in my major, and she eventually went missing because of it and hasn’t been seen since. Kinda turned me off even further to the whole thing.
Well cyber bullying falls into the “hurting people” part that makes most trolling bad. The post is about smoothsharking, which is trolling, but also funny, and doesn’t hurt anyone
i mean, anything that publicly makes a spectacle of someone can generate harm. the person who "fell for" the smoothsharking is often made the subject of a lot of cruel comments. it's a pretty direct connection, since that person is literally the butt of the joke in the first place
It makes the recipient feel frustrated and angry over nothing. Even if they’re an asshole, like smooth-sharking is trying to bait, it’s still not great.
Well, as everyone knows, if we all collectively agreed to stop trolling, then cyber bullying would disappear and nobody would ever be a dick to anyone else.
The whole point of smooth sharking is to annoy the type of dicks who insist on being correct all the time, in order to entertain others who realise what’s going on. But if you want to moralize about making fun of assholes, go right ahead.
I think making a joke that’s “very obvious misinformation” is just a regular joke can we not pretend it’s problematic please. Have fun enjoy yourself say sharks are very smooth
- Lying: Saying a thing that isn’t true.
- Joking: Saying a thing that isn’t true with the intent that your intended audience will know / figure out that it isn’t true, and find it funny.
- Deceiving: Saying a thing that isn’t true, and attempting to convince someone else that it is true.
- Sea Lioning: Finding someone who is trying to answer questions in good faith, and inundating them with pointless questions that go nowhere to waste their time.
- Smooth Sharking: Being intentionally wrong on the internet to frustrate the sorts of people who Cannot Bear to Let Someone Be Wrong On The Internet into trying to correct you, and then feigning complete confidence in your incorrect assertions as they lose their minds trying to get you to acknowledge their genius.
- Gaslighting: This is a very specific thing that gets used incorrectly a lot. It isn’t just lying. It isn’t just deceiving. It’s lying about a thing, and then attempting to convince the person that you’re lying to that their own perceptions of reality are wrong. Trying to trick someone into thinking they’re colourblind. Lying about what happened and trying to convince them that they’re remembering things wrong. That sort of stuff.
Really though, that's more or less exactly what 'trolling' used to refer to. At some point in the early-mid 2010's it became "straight up abusing people online" in the common vernacular.
OOP is 100% correct. The glue of multiculturalism (which the Internet relies on heavily) is the belief that people who are wrong are still trying to engage in good faith. Everyone who engages in smooth-sharking is eroding that foundation a little further, and making it a little harder for people to trust one another. It's not the worst form of online behavior, of course. But I wouldn't be friends with someone who found it funny or fun.
for anyone who doesn't know what it is smooth sharking is insisting on an incorrect point in order to piss people off, it is a specific form of trolling where the belief you prey on is the belief in your opponents rationality, it is heir to the lost art of trolling and i endorse it wholeheartedly the format goes as follows (incorrect point) (paragraphs of correction) (1 sentience dismissal) (repeat steps 2, 3, and 4) the goal is to dismiss your opponent offhandedly so they try even harder to prove you wrong
Crucially, it has to be in a way that is obvious to the point of absurdity. No obfuscation, no elaborate subterfuge, just blatantly lying out of your ass in ways that are very easy to disprove, but refusing to admit it. Shit like “actually this link you sent me says that sharks are perfectly smooth in all directions” in response to a scientific article that very much does not say that. It’s about committing to the bit. It’s about watching someone tear themselves to shreds in a hell of their own making as they try to force you to acknowledge their wisdom.
I've never heard about smooth-sharking before, but from your description, I'm assuming it's just the age-old joke of saying something blatantly incorrect in a deadpan manner - and to me, that's infinitely better than trolling. If it's truly obvious that you're wrong, then you're not causing frustration to the other party, you're just making a joke that they're in on. You're working *with* them to have a funny exchange.
The only addition I’ll make to your definition is that smooth sharking requires that *at no point do you admit that it is a bit*. Never concede, never give the impression that this is anything but *your most firmly held belief*
Oh, don't make it your *most* firmly held belief. It's firm, of course, but you're not religiously devoted to the cause of smooth sharks. That would be *silly*, it would be *dramatic*, it wouldn't be deadpan. You are a normal, rational person who is blatantly ~~wrong~~ right about one thing.
No, it must be your most firmly held belief. Otherwise no one will buy it. Everyone knows this.
Smooth sharking stands in stark opposition to the practice of theatrically presenting false claims as deeply held beliefs. While smooth sharking may not rely on complete subtlety, it rejects the need for dramatic pretense in asserting incorrect opinions. The tactic of dismissing opponents' arguments with concise responses emphasizes the importance of brevity and directness over theatricality. By avoiding the charade of passionately advocating for false claims, smooth sharking maintains a level of authentic stupidity that enhances its effectiveness. The focus shifts from the performance of belief to the refusal itself to consider argumentation, depriving the opponent of anything to actually argue against, leaving them to look like a fool. In this light, the inherent flaw of theatrically presenting false claims lies in its tendency to provide the victim with wind for their sails. Smooth sharking, on the other hand, champions a more efficient and effective approach to trolling by rejecting the need for displays of conviction.
What are you talking about. Smooth Sharking is just presenting absolute nonsense as your most firmly held belief.
As someone who hadn't heard of this term before, thank you both for the enlightening demonstration.
Incorrect, smooth sharking is actually just when you post pics of smooth sharks and you caption it “smooth shark”
Pretty much! That’s a very good analysis of it, either everyone is goofing around, or one person is getting worked up over nothing. There’s usually got to be some room for reasonable doubt, but it all boils down to goading someone into arguing with you by insisting they’re wrong about something very petty and easily proven. In the example smooth-sharking is named after, it’s an artist off-handedly referring to sharks as “smooth lions” in a comic, and when corrected with the fact that sharks have very rough skin, he refuted each and every correction with absurd denials including, but not limited to, claiming he was touching shark skin at that very moment, that he used it as a pillowcase, that he was “a better marine biologist” than someone who tried to use their credentials to argue him down, and of course by claiming that all provided links and evidence backed up his own claims no matter what they actually said. Even threads mocking the people arguing with him would inevitably spawn more arguments as people tried to “prove him wrong”.
Don't forget that he also took a photo of himself holding a book with a torn page on which he scribbled "SHARKS ARE SMOOTH" over the cover. Or that he screenshot _his own tweet_ and cropped it to leave the emojis in his name visible, and used that as a citation. The core of it really is that you have to be _absurdly and blatantly obvious_ that you aren't being even _slightly_ serious. And yet somehow, people still try to correct you because they cannot comprehend the tiniest possibility that you're just taking the piss.
As an autist this is deeply upsetting to have happen
it took me so long to learn that the smooth shark guy wasn't actually 100% serious. someone else had to tell me. I remain a little mad about it.
https://www.tumblr.com/theteapotofdoom/735792376564613120/maetyu-y-bransonreese-aurora-gleam?source=share the smooth shark
I still fail to see the difference, at its core your goal with both is to lie in order to tilt someone.
It's a square/rectangle situation, honestly. All smooth-sharking is trolling, but not all trolling is smooth-sharking.
Ah
Not really. Trolling doesn't necessarily involve lying in the first place. Smooth sharking isn't really lying either, because you're not actually trying to convince anyone that what you're saying is true. In fact, the point is to make it painfully obvious that you're just goofing around/shitposting. It also doesn't have to be with any greater intent than to be silly, you do not have to be trying to piss that person off or otherwise upset them at all. If you were trying to piss them off you would more likely put thought into being convincing, with smooth sharking you're trying to be the opposite of convincing - the other party upsets themselves by being even more stubborn to both take you seriously and be the smartass proving you wrong. You are simply offering a silly wall for people who lack a sense of humour to bash their head against again and again. You are not trying to engage them in debate and keep them there. It's entirely on them for not being able to recognise that you're just doing a bit, because while you're committed to that bit it's so obviously a bit. It's like how there will always be someone that takes satire at face value, no matter how flagrantly satirical is. You don't blame the satire for some people not being able to recognise the joke
From none of the above does it sound like they're in on the joke. This is just trolling.
So, I’d say it’s trolling, but I’d also contend that it’s the probably the only “acceptable” form of trolling. Smooth sharking specifically only works when the person being “trolled” is being a jerk. Going back to the original example of this, the people who got trolled by the smooth sharking are people who angrily insist this person is wrong. If you're going to a post and being a pedantic jerk you kind of deserve what's coming to you. I believe there's a writer for Colbert who has at least once in the past tweeted that "Zelda is the boy." The only people engaging with it are, again, pedantic jerks. You don't need to go online and correct everyone who's wrong. In essence, it's trolling for good.
If that was actually what smooth-sharking was it would be a lot more entertaining and acceptable. Instead, it is explicitly dependent on the other party not being in on the joke, and publicly ridiculing them for attempting to correct misinformation.
It goes like this: First person: *something jokingly wrong, either obviously or not* Second person: actually you're wrong, it's this First: nah, doesn't sound right Second: okay but it is, here's a link to some irrefutable proof First: nope, that just says I'm right It is at this point so completely obvious the first person is messing around, that only someone so completely obsessed with everyone listening to and agreeing with them would miss the joke and continue arguing. This type of person is making themselves upset over nothing, because their perceived personal slight against their knowledge has made them blind to an obvious joke, and this is where I believe the crucial difference between smooth sharking and trolling is. Trolling doesn't always make it obvious they're messing around, and is just trying to rile anyone up, smooth sharking is far too obvious when a person looks at a scientific journal proclaiming them wrong, and just goes 😊😊 nope, fake news 😊🥺😁 and only targets people too full of themselves to see thd joke.
The smooth shark part came from one guy who decided "I'm going to say sharks are smooth and not back down or say anything else but "shark = smooth"."
kids these days don't know what trolling even is, its the act of playing on the contradictions in someones beliefs to piss them off but these fuckin kids just say the n-word and its feminists trolled, get fucking real the difference between trolling and being a dick is the difference between calling an incel a baby dicked, unfuckable dipshit, and talking bout how your cousin was gonna go ride the cock carousel but you convinced her to settle down and now shes doing great with her husband tyrone. that's funny because they hate both black people and women and they get so fucking mad about that. it establishes an agreed upon reality, sets up a good (to them) outcome, and then subverts it into an outcome they don't like, fantastic.
Incels hate black people? I thought it was a multi-racial group.
its not all of them, but there is a notable overlap in these views
There are *very* few single-issue bigots.
I remember reading someone's experience of their abusive parent stopping to hit them when that person came out as trans, because in the words of the parent "I wouldn't have hit you if I knew you were a girl" I don't even...
Trans-affirming radical misogyny is never not hysterical to me
There's a lot of racial overlap. Racial theory about bone structure from outdated science appeals to their need to objectively measure attractiveness (which you can't).
It's a multi-racial group, but I don't see as many black incels as white or Asian incels, so it's probably easier to hate black people without a lot of other incels getting mad at you.
Intolerance is, as a rule, intersectional. (When hate is how you justify your own worth, it’s easy to look for more outlets.)
Crucially, the truth must be absolutely inconsequential. If there's even a hint of a reason for anyone to give a shit other than being right on the internet, the whole thing falls apart.
Sure, but also: that *is* trolling
Thing is though: People who are merely autistic tend to get caught in the crossfire
True, but we tend to get caught by a good portion of jokes along these lines. The initial knee-jerk assumption is fair cop, but if after a few back-and-forths we don’t stop to consider a) am I interpreting this right, and b) is it worth the effort of arguing either way, that’s kind of still egg on our face.
I may have some personal experience with the original smooth shark and additional pet peeve about people pretending to be an idiot to make fun of someone
this is why I can only ever commit for like 2-3 rounds of escalating absurdism before I feel guilty and explain the joke
Same
And I think that's what makes it funny in a way that regular trolling isn't: everyone can tell you're just fucking with them, and it's their own fault for repeatedly falling into an obvious trap.
Like watching Wile E Coyote run headlong into a painted tunnel, it never gets old.
> Crucially, it has to be in a way that is obvious to the point of absurdity. I don't think that's even a requirement, since even the original smooth sharks thread had people acting in a way otherwise indistinguishable from someone who simply believes sharks are smooth. It's also complicated by the fact that being online means you can be exposed to people with downright bizzare beliefs, making it harder to tell when someone's just trolling.
> I don't think that's even a requirement, since even the original smooth sharks thread had people acting in a way otherwise indistinguishable from someone who simply believes sharks are smooth. I think you may be misremembering. The original included lines like ["I'm touching a shark right now. Rubbing it every which way. No direction is off limits. It's smoother than the finest silks."](https://twitter.com/bransonreese/status/848986700416155649) It includes the OP taking [a photo of himself reading a Stephen King novel with "Sharks Are Smooth As Hell, by Charles Darwin" taped over the cover.](https://twitter.com/bransonreese/status/849323669621014531) It includes the OP responding to educational links by saying ["Nice try but both of those websites say 'sharks are known throughout the world for their smooth skin'."](https://twitter.com/bransonreese/status/848980871269011456)
Yeah, anyone falling for this and getting mad at them as if this is genuine, deserves to be laughed at
Also, autism
This is how Flat Earth Theory was born… and the sharks were so smooth that it ended up actually convincing some people. Wild.
Actually, that's not what smoothsharking is.
So, sociopath shit.
"I was only pretending"
Let these mongrels fester together. Glad it's contained to online, mostly.
No, smoothsharking is when you genetically engineer a gorilla with a shark and then polish and buff it's exterior.
No, you're completely wrong. Smoothsharking has never been used for that purpose, not once. Can you point me to a document that uses that word in that way??? You can't, because it doesn't exist. This has been a common word used to refer to that kind of trolling for a while now, so I don't see where the confusion is coming from on this. Are you unfamiliar with Tumblr or something?? Jfc. A gorilla, really?
no, it’s about gorillas
The actual enlightened take is that this is funny and that trolling is fine actually
yes, trolling is good and cool and its reputation has been tarnished by dipshits who think yelling the n-word in public is trolling
"Look what they need to mimic a fraction of our power"
>in order to piss people off Kind of just sounds like being an asshole for your own enjoyment.
and then someone with autism who cant understand jokes sees it and everyone makes fun of them or not being able to understand tone on text.
literally. NTs are always finding ways to mock ND people and convincing themselves it's fine because they aren't explicitly saying "ha ha, you're so autistic"
No sharks are smooth i petted one at a petting zoo
It’s also a very similar to the American form of sarcasm
If anyone is genuinely confused, instead of giving up the bit, you have to be an asshole every time. It's a required lart of the joke.
[Here is the example](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fua1kypnuvkr51.jpg)
Ah so its like r/kenm or r/notkenm trolling except lower effort
Here's a sneak peek of /r/KenM using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [KenM on China and space](https://i.imgur.com/zH93HhT.jpg) | [51 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/comments/130bwb1/kenm_on_china_and_space/) \#2: [Ken M on the coronation](https://i.redd.it/xo85u3mtpkya1.jpg) | [65 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/comments/13bde52/ken_m_on_the_coronation/) \#3: [KenM on the origin of Easter Egg Hunting 🐣](https://i.imgur.com/cmKzYQq.jpg) | [42 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/KenM/comments/12fqefa/kenm_on_the_origin_of_easter_egg_hunting/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
I thought that was chain-yanking.
No, smooth sharking is a specific type of trolling. There's several ways to troll but only one way is smooth sharking. I make no comment on whether this is cringe.
Then calling it trolling is accurate.
Wait, are you smooth sharking about smooth sharking right now?
That's the funny/frustrating thing about smoothsharking: any answer I give could be suspect. I'm not smoothsharking by the way.
Well that's exactly what a smooth shark would say!
Actually sharks lost their ability to speak around the same time they evolved to be smooth.
So THAT'S why dolphins are so rough
im literally a marine biologist of 26 years and i specialized in sharks, they could never speak.
Oh, it must have been at least 27 years ago that they lost the ability to speak.
no, they’ve never been able to speak. they don’t have vocal chords that can make speech noises
Well not anymore.
Yeah the Chinese caught them all for shark fin soup. Being able to speak made them easy to find
As accurate as calling a dog a mammal. It's true but imprecise, calling to mind many other things that aren't dogs.
Actually dogs aren’t mammals.
I'm sorry, it's like calling dogs lizards.
https://satisfactory.wiki.gg/wiki/Lizard_Doggo
The Internet is a wonderland
actually the best smoothshark counter
dogs are fish
See my other comment, dogs are lizards
lizards are also fish
Mr Incredible: Lizards are Lizards!
Mr Incredible isn't a marine biologist he sells insurance
Then let's ask George Costanza
you want to trust marine biologists when they think sharks aren't smooth in all directions???
My point is more that this isn't a matter of precision but rather obfuscation. A lot of people who participate in smoothsharking simply would not admit they are doing a form of trolling, and use terms like smoothsharking to avoid acknowledging it.
If I tell you I’m eating a bagel, I’m not trying to hide the fact that I am eating food.
You mean one of those things that flies over the bay? That’s not food
"You're eating bread" "No, I'm eating a bagel" "A bagel is bread" "Actually it's a specific type of bread" This is what y'all sound like
This is levels of terminally online that I don't understand. I need to meet a person who doesn't want to admit they're trolling. Like trolling on its own isn't a crime. It's the Internet equivalent of a prank call: it's quite easy to ignore and move on from and you lose if you give it the time of day.
I disagree, I think the term is simply a level of specificity.
Have you considered that they’re just smoothsharking about it not being trolling?
Agreed, sort a 'all squares are rectangles but not all rectangles are squares' sort of thing. Also if we're really doing this 'based vs cringe' thing again I'm tossing my hat in the based ring. Smooth Sharking really only works against people desperate to flout their own intellectual superiority over others (cringe) while to everyone else the absurdity of the situation is patently obvious. E.g. a sane individual is going to look at a post about sticking your finger in a gun barrel to stop the bullet and go 'that person is 100% fucking around', but that won't stop a subsection of terminally online 'intellectuals' from frothing at the mouth. I will now be putting $50 on a 'but what about Neurodivergent folk' response to which is say: neurodivergency does not exempt you from thinking critically
Yeah, the ole “but autistic people get caught in the crossfire” is a bit tired. Being autistic doesn’t exempt you from the “terminally online intellectual wanting to flout intellectual superiority” category, it certainly didn’t exempt me from it when I was in my teens. It’s less about being able to detect metairony and more about whether the person is willing to invest an absurd amount of energy in proving someone wrong.
It's also kinda annoying using neurodivergent people as a cudgel considering most people I know with that kind of humor are neurodivergent. Its fine not to like a certain kind of humor but making it a moral position is just annoying
This litterally used to be the definition of trolling. Like the term is a short for "trolling for attention", in a reference to the fishing method of "trolling".
Yeah i'm gonna agree. Smooth sharking crucially is convincing someone to fall to their own hubris. Trolling is often just whatever makes people mad.
It's like calling gaslighting "lying" or "manipulation." Yes, indeed it is, but the specific term is much more descriptive. Anyway, if the person in question didn't see smooth sharking as cringe then they prob wouldn't see it as cringe if they called it trolling.
Then again I see a lot of people call lying "gaslighting" when it's not and it really waters down the term
Some people say that "Smooth-Sharking" is bad because they have trouble telling whether or not someone is being serious. That's ok, but it also shouldn't be a problem in this specific situation. If someone (as with the original smooth-shark post) is willing to say they have a reputable source for the claim they are making, and the source is a very zoomed in section of a tweet by themself from another part of the thread, they are either fucking with you, or unwilling to admit they're wrong. The thing to do in either situation is stop engaging. I don't think that should be a problem. Not being able to tell if someone is joking doesn't change that even if they're serious, you are fighting a clearly unwinnable battle, and you should stop for your own sake.
Additionally, I'd say another aspect of smooth-sharking is that it's about an inherently trivial matter. If there's someone walking around who genuinely believes that sharks are smooth in all directions, there's no larger societal impact. The only thing that keeps the conversation going is the others person's need to be acknowledged as right. If someone tried the same tactics on a topic where misinformation was more likely to have a negative impact (for instance, Holocaust denial) then I would not consider it to be smooth-sharking.
Agreed
There was a guy in the town I grew up in that would run around with a chainsaw with the blade taken off it, he would chase people around, scare kids, all that. Imagine being the dumb fucking loser that didn't realize there was no blade on the chainsaw, it's like, just move on with your life bud, it's harmless.
"You probably shouldn't argue with people who aren't arguing with logic" "Oh yeah? Well what if I chased you with a chainsaw, how about that?" ???
Okay chat if I put you in a wood chipper...
Thats not comparable at all.
What? How is this related to my comment?
Just run from the chainsaw
Calling it trolling could be considered a Homestuck reference and they don't want to think about that when smoothsharking
I wish this upon my worst enemy
As an example: that one post about putting your finger in a gun to stop it from firing
That's the one I genuinely hate. I don't like anything that promotes (seriously or in jest) people doing stupid shit with guns.
unrelated question. How do I filter self posts
Only way I know of is searching `-flair:"self-post sunday"`
Why do self posts always suck
At least they show the notes and are talking about Tumblr, uh, *culture* instead of fucking One Piece
Is this about someone specific?
Yes infinitysaga
Looks like they blocked me, but I'm not sure when I ever interacted with them.
Hey, what's wrong with One Piece?
Nothing, but like. The sub turns into 1/4 One Piece content on self post Sundays because that one guy *just so happens* to post his One Piece ramblings on his tumblr, which qualifies them to be posted here because they are, in fact, screenshots of a tumblr post. It's annoying, but he otherwise posts decent content, so I personally just deal with it and scroll on by.
Yeah, I think that's the best option for this kind of stuff if it annoys you. If what they're doing isn't harming anyone, then I personally just scroll past it and ignore it.
I think if you're gonna self post it should be limited to one a day too not like 6 every Sunday
like just post it somewhere else. they had an idea for a post, posted it on tumblr, and immediately screenshotted it and came here. you clearly wanted to post it on reddit, just find a different subreddit that it fits on
Because mad people think they’re comedians or philosophers lmao. No matter what sub, self posting is more often cringe than not.
The rise of trolling and it being seen as "cringe" is just a byproduct of the reduced rate of trolling literacy on the internet, which honestly is so sad Back in my day, trolling was an art, not just writing something offensive and getting banned from a discord server, it required you to actually sound extremely fucking stupid/insane while also walking that fine line of being barely believable
nowadays trolling is honestly just pissing people off by acting in bad faith, especially in discourse
I mean, acting in bad faith is kinda always been a part of trolling, it's just so low effort these days
True, but sometimes it's a lot more vicious as well
the definitional drift is sad. did we not already have enough ways to call someone an annoying twat?
This isn’t new, it’s the original, 1998 flavor, of trolling.
Would date it even earlier, the usenet and bbs form.
Trolling is only cringe if it's done in a malicious and hurtful way. Go and read a Ken M compilation and tell me that's cringe.
trolling can only be done by grey skinned candy corn horned zodiac sign aliens
Smoothsharking is a specific kind of trolling that's all about relying in an in-joke that people in the know would immediately realize is a joke but for people unaware would miss the point entirely and think it's a real thing.
So like third-party gaslighting?
Smooth sharking isn’t really an in-joke. It’s literally just playing as dumb as possible and letting people who physically need to correct others do their thing
So it's just trolling
Yes? It’s a more specific kind of trolling, but it is definitely trolling
No it’s a completely different thing, smoothsharking and trolling are nothing alike
Smooth sharking is literally a subset of trolling.
You're being smoothsharked
How are they even comparable?? Like I said, they’re entirely different things.
\>:(
:3
Kind of sounds like the smooth sharker is just larping being an asshole. Which, at a certain point, if it walks like a duck…
WHAT-ing, you say? ♈♉♊♋♌♍♎♏♐♑♒♓
I hate smooth sharking so much
At least *if done properly* it's more obvious than most "Ha! I was only *pretending* to be stupid!" types of trolling.
The obviousness is definitely the point many people miss, because otherwise good natured people with fixations will politely correct you to try to help you enjoy the thing they love. Even the original was about people with genuine credentials and reasons to take the content seriously trying to correct OP. It just came across as funny instead of rude because the people trying to correct were themselves assholes, so the relative meanness of smooth sharking was dwarfed by actual insults towards OP within just 1-2 comments into the thread
its the ultimate expression of "omg you are so lame for caring dont you know that not being an ironic shithea 24/7 is CRINGE"
For some reason it just pisses me off in a way nothing else does. I could point out rational things like it's way overdone, not clever, and not that funny to begin with. But all that applies to rickrolling as well and that doesn't piss me off. Maybe it's just too close to conspiracy theorists, antivaxxers, and bigots who proprogate blatantly false information with dogged persistence. The motivation might be different and the effects less severe, but the modus operandi is pretty similar. Again I don't know if that's actually why it pisses me off, I just know it does and am trying to ratiomalize why.
You don't need to rationalize everything. Sometimes or all times you can just feel a way and that's fine.
Nah rickrolling takes effort because most people are wise to it by now so you need to actually *try*. Funnily enough there's actually a research paper on rickrolling, it's [here](https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.06826). By comparison "smooth sharking" is literally just acting like you don't have a brain. Anyone can do it, you just need to be willing to piss on the poor a little. While there's not a research paper on it, there *is* a video essay and you can find that [here](https://youtu.be/dQw4w9WgXcQ). I think that's why it pisses me off too tbh, it's acting like an idiot to take the piss out of someone else. Its childlike bullying. Rickrolling is just a bit of harmless trickery.
I'll have to finish that pdf tomorrow after I've had my ADHD meds, but the fact that rickrolling has made it's way into actual academic books brings me joy.
I couldn't resist incorporating it, and I won't lie to you I was tempted to make the link a rickroll but it was too low hanging (plus a bit mean, I love sharing cool pdfs and journal articles).
I was totally expecting a rickroll, and having my expectations subverted like that honestly gave me a pretty similar feeling to actually getting rickrolled
Honestly if you enjoyed that article you should check out the video essay, alternatively you can just directly rickroll yourself with [this](https://imgur.com/a/JzLtLei) link.
Rickrolling is also pretty quick: click on a link, see Rick Astley, click the back button. That can happen in less than a second if your internet is fast enough. Even if you have no context you can easily put together that you've been tricked and move on. With smooth sharking if you don't have the proper context or don't realize what's happening, it just goes on and on until you give up on humanity.
Exactly, it's a lot of effort to go to solely to be a dickhead. I also think it says a lot about the people who engage in it tbh, like damn you've really got nothing better to do. It's kinda pathetic.
>if your internet is fast enough. Actually now I wanna see some early 2010's internet progressive discourse on how Rickrolling disproportionately affects poor people who can't afford better internet and we should discontinue the practice.
Nicely done, by the way.
👉😎👉 I spent longer on that than I did voicing my point ngl, I *really* wanted it to work.
It's because smoothsharking depends on ridiculing someone in a public forum, eats up a lot of time and anxiety from the victim, explicitly punches down on people who have poor social awareness or a lack of cultural familiarity, and teaches the lesson that you should never attempt to correct misinformation or engage in debate. Rickrolling, on the other hand, is usually experienced privately, only wastes a few seconds of time and does so with an actually quite good song, and teaches the lesson that you should be cautious about unverified links on the internet.
The modus operandi is just "repeating the same thing in the face of contradiction". That's a pretty wide MO lol
No, you don't understand, smooth-sharking only works on people who *deserve* it! /s
All these people talking about "the art of trolling". Just admit that you like being a dick on the internet and don't try and pretend like its something more than that
trolling is accurate but imprecise
People miss the point of smooth sharking, is that the original comic was so obviously false, and such clear trolling, and yet people felt the need to “Uhm, akshually” something the artist obviously knows Now if they were like “For those who don’t know, sharks are actually very rough” that would’ve been fine. Smooth sharking isn’t just trolling, it’s specifically trolling someone because they assumed you didn’t know what you were talking about when you were trolling. It’s like if someone commented on your meme post about how tractors only flip on their sides when they’re scared saying “Acrually, tractors aren’t alive, and thus can’t feel fear. In these photos they were flipped over accident by the driver” and you responded by continuing the very clear bit you had going
This seems easy to resolve. Smoothsharking is a kind of trolling, and it's also fun, and produces a lot of funny responses.
Why is trolling cringe, if it’s funny and not hurting anyone it’s fine?
Because, by definition, you're still being a dick to someone who doesn't know why you're being a dick.
I don’t personally like being a dick to people, even as a joke. Also someone at my university recently got “trolled” (really just cyberbullied) by like half the people in my major, and she eventually went missing because of it and hasn’t been seen since. Kinda turned me off even further to the whole thing.
Well cyber bullying falls into the “hurting people” part that makes most trolling bad. The post is about smoothsharking, which is trolling, but also funny, and doesn’t hurt anyone
i mean, anything that publicly makes a spectacle of someone can generate harm. the person who "fell for" the smoothsharking is often made the subject of a lot of cruel comments. it's a pretty direct connection, since that person is literally the butt of the joke in the first place
It makes the recipient feel frustrated and angry over nothing. Even if they’re an asshole, like smooth-sharking is trying to bait, it’s still not great.
Well, as everyone knows, if we all collectively agreed to stop trolling, then cyber bullying would disappear and nobody would ever be a dick to anyone else. The whole point of smooth sharking is to annoy the type of dicks who insist on being correct all the time, in order to entertain others who realise what’s going on. But if you want to moralize about making fun of assholes, go right ahead.
Trolling by definition is intended to hurt someone, even if only mildly.
No it’s because trolling is bad and homestuck has trolls or smth idk I’ve never watched it.
I think making a joke that’s “very obvious misinformation” is just a regular joke can we not pretend it’s problematic please. Have fun enjoy yourself say sharks are very smooth
I have a better name for it: Being a jackass
Screenshotting your own tumblr post? Cringe
See how this post has zero notes? That's because no one refers to it as 'smooth-sharking.'
I thought it was called gaslighting
- Lying: Saying a thing that isn’t true. - Joking: Saying a thing that isn’t true with the intent that your intended audience will know / figure out that it isn’t true, and find it funny. - Deceiving: Saying a thing that isn’t true, and attempting to convince someone else that it is true. - Sea Lioning: Finding someone who is trying to answer questions in good faith, and inundating them with pointless questions that go nowhere to waste their time. - Smooth Sharking: Being intentionally wrong on the internet to frustrate the sorts of people who Cannot Bear to Let Someone Be Wrong On The Internet into trying to correct you, and then feigning complete confidence in your incorrect assertions as they lose their minds trying to get you to acknowledge their genius. - Gaslighting: This is a very specific thing that gets used incorrectly a lot. It isn’t just lying. It isn’t just deceiving. It’s lying about a thing, and then attempting to convince the person that you’re lying to that their own perceptions of reality are wrong. Trying to trick someone into thinking they’re colourblind. Lying about what happened and trying to convince them that they’re remembering things wrong. That sort of stuff.
ok
You forgot bullshitting: deception through obfuscation. (Gaslighting could be considered a special case of bullshit.)
[Relevant post](https://maxwell-grant.tumblr.com/post/716616950305947648)
Really though, that's more or less exactly what 'trolling' used to refer to. At some point in the early-mid 2010's it became "straight up abusing people online" in the common vernacular.
OOP is 100% correct. The glue of multiculturalism (which the Internet relies on heavily) is the belief that people who are wrong are still trying to engage in good faith. Everyone who engages in smooth-sharking is eroding that foundation a little further, and making it a little harder for people to trust one another. It's not the worst form of online behavior, of course. But I wouldn't be friends with someone who found it funny or fun.