A thread titled “What does it even mean to be good at flame wars (レスバ)?” sparked a debate over whether flame-warring is a technique for winding up your opponent so they stick around, or just a pointless, unproductive slugfest.
In the end, it came down to everyone having their own personal definition of “winning” — from “it’s not about who’s right, it’s about who gets the last word” to “the safe bet is only jumping in when you can tell you’re backing the winning side.”
Does it mean someone with airtight logic, or just someone who's really good at pissing people off?
Anyone who's out here flame-warring has already lost, both sides.
There's no such thing as "winning" that.
There's no such thing as "winning" that.
>>6
Exactly, it's a technique for winding people up so the thread stays alive longer.
Post normally and the thread just dies instantly on dead VIP (a low-traffic board).
Exactly, it's a technique for winding people up so the thread stays alive longer.
Post normally and the thread just dies instantly on dead VIP (a low-traffic board).
>>9
There's no winning or losing in that.
Both sides just walk away with nothing to show for it.
There's no winning or losing in that.
Both sides just walk away with nothing to show for it.
>>9
This is just your own personal rule, you can't generalize it as "true for everyone" — testing out picking a flame war with that line.
This is just your own personal rule, you can't generalize it as "true for everyone" — testing out picking a flame war with that line.
>>17
There is something to gain —
you get better at figuring out how to bait people with your replies.
There is something to gain —
you get better at figuring out how to bait people with your replies.
>>18
A flame war is just people who like flame wars hurling insults at each other, that's all it is.
It's the same insult-slinging over and over, not a skill.
There's nothing to gain from it, you just repeat it day after day.
A flame war is just people who like flame wars hurling insults at each other, that's all it is.
It's the same insult-slinging over and over, not a skill.
There's nothing to gain from it, you just repeat it day after day.
The moment you're flame-warring you might as well be shouting "I'm an idiot," right?
>>20
Well, yeah.
Well, yeah.
Flame wars on an anonymous board aren't real flame wars.
Go have a serious showdown somewhere you can't run away from, like X (formerly Twitter).
Go have a serious showdown somewhere you can't run away from, like X (formerly Twitter).
>>21
I'm genuinely into watching flame wars as a hobby, but I think it's only old-timers with nowhere else to post but VIP who actually do this.
The content really does reek of "old man."
I'm genuinely into watching flame wars as a hobby, but I think it's only old-timers with nowhere else to post but VIP who actually do this.
The content really does reek of "old man."
>>21
I get that a bit.
Anonymity makes it too easy to just bail.
I get that a bit.
Anonymity makes it too easy to just bail.
>>24
You get to experiment — "this works on this type, let's try that on this guy."
VIP's so dead now that if you troll with the same theme, you reel in the same guy every time.
You get to experiment — "this works on this type, let's try that on this guy."
VIP's so dead now that if you troll with the same theme, you reel in the same guy every time.
>>25
You're not just watching, you're also a participant in flame wars yourself, aren't you?
You're not just watching, you're also a participant in flame wars yourself, aren't you?
>>29
I always run my replies past an AI before posting,
and it told me the same thing —
something like "you're crossing from observer into manipulator territory."
I always run my replies past an AI before posting,
and it told me the same thing —
something like "you're crossing from observer into manipulator territory."
>>28
Flame wars are all the same one note.
"What middle school are you from? You know so-and-so senpai? Huh?"
That's the level we're talking about, zero technique.
Flame wars are all the same one note.
"What middle school are you from? You know so-and-so senpai? Huh?"
That's the level we're talking about, zero technique.
>>31
Nope.
You've already left tracks in this very thread showing you flame-war all the time.
Can you spot it yourself?
Nope.
You've already left tracks in this very thread showing you flame-war all the time.
Can you spot it yourself?
>>34
Yeah, I flame-war.
Obviously.
Yeah, I flame-war.
Obviously.
Now that we've got an answer…
so is a flame war just killing time, a pointless battle with no winner, loser, or payoff? Is that the verdict?
so is a flame war just killing time, a pointless battle with no winner, loser, or payoff? Is that the verdict?
>>43
Yeah, it's pointless.
I just enjoy it, that's all.
Yeah, it's pointless.
I just enjoy it, that's all.
>>43
A flame war isn't about whose conclusion is right. Whoever posts the last reply wins. (＾ω＾)
A flame war isn't about whose conclusion is right. Whoever posts the last reply wins. (＾ω＾)
>>44
I wrote that as my own opinion.
I'm not trying to shoot down anyone who feels differently.
I wrote that as my own opinion.
I'm not trying to shoot down anyone who feels differently.
>>46
This thread's about what "good at flame wars" generally means, so just laying out your own personal rule doesn't get us anywhere.
It needs to hold up as at least somewhat general.
This thread's about what "good at flame wars" generally means, so just laying out your own personal rule doesn't get us anywhere.
It needs to hold up as at least somewhat general.
>>45
Because you were the one saying flame wars sharpen your technique, that it's a skill.
Because you were the one saying flame wars sharpen your technique, that it's a skill.
>>48
Well, yeah.
That's just how I enjoy it.
Well, yeah.
That's just how I enjoy it.
>>47
By your rule, whoever has the most free time on their hands wins.
That's not really "winning or losing," is it?
By your rule, whoever has the most free time on their hands wins.
That's not really "winning or losing," is it?
>>50
I mean, it's not a debate, it's a flame war, right?
I mean, it's not a debate, it's a flame war, right?
In a flame war, whoever doesn't lose wins.
>>51
That's the psychology of it —
if you think you won, you won.
And there's nothing to gain from it, it's pointless.
That's the psychology of it —
if you think you won, you won.
And there's nothing to gain from it, it's pointless.
>>55
I'll give you a serious answer —
I'd say the moment you engage, you've already lost.
I'll give you a serious answer —
I'd say the moment you engage, you've already lost.
You're strong if you only ever back the winning horse.
When other people are already flame-warring and it's obvious one side has the logic and the momentum, jumping in to back them up is the smart move.
Only get involved when you're guaranteed to win, and ignore everything else — that's the tried-and-true method.
When other people are already flame-warring and it's obvious one side has the logic and the momentum, jumping in to back them up is the smart move.
Only get involved when you're guaranteed to win, and ignore everything else — that's the tried-and-true method.
>>60
There's no such thing as "logic" in a flame war, is there?
There's no such thing as "logic" in a flame war, is there?
>>64
Sometimes there is.
I won't deny it's mostly dumb bickering and name-calling at its core.
So I steer clear of the ones that look like they'll turn into a slog.
At the very least, that means I never lose.
Sometimes there is.
I won't deny it's mostly dumb bickering and name-calling at its core.
So I steer clear of the ones that look like they'll turn into a slog.
At the very least, that means I never lose.
>>66
Fair enough.
There are idiots out there who just keep repeating "got a source?"
even for stuff you could find with a two-second Google search.
Fair enough.
There are idiots out there who just keep repeating "got a source?"
even for stuff you could find with a two-second Google search.
>>66
How do you even decide who won, though?
I don't think you can judge it objectively —
you can't measure how annoyed each side got, and there's no shared rule for what even counts as a win in the first place.
How do you even decide who won, though?
I don't think you can judge it objectively —
you can't measure how annoyed each side got, and there's no shared rule for what even counts as a win in the first place.
>>77
Back in the PC era there were way fewer of these pointless shouting matches than there are now.
Back in the PC era there were way fewer of these pointless shouting matches than there are now.
>>79
Not sure what you mean by "the PC era," but this stuff's been around forever.
Not sure what you mean by "the PC era," but this stuff's been around forever.
>>83
Wait, don't tell me you're still browsing 5ch on a PC?
Wait, don't tell me you're still browsing 5ch on a PC?
>>84
I only ever do it on a PC.
Only when I'm sitting at my desk at home, too.
I only ever do it on a PC.
Only when I'm sitting at my desk at home, too.
>>84
Funny how things flipped — people used to mock you with "what, you on a mo-shi-mo-shi phone?" (an old jab at mobile/flip-phone posters, back when browsing from a PC was the norm).
Funny how things flipped — people used to mock you with "what, you on a mo-shi-mo-shi phone?" (an old jab at mobile/flip-phone posters, back when browsing from a PC was the norm).
*This article is compiled from excerpts of and a summary based on the 5ch (Newsspeed VIP) thread「What does it even mean to be good at flame wars?」.
Leave a Reply