Content Warning: From another thread, Metadiscussion, derailing, block-policy.
(This post is a continuation of a discussion from another thread)

(I read your response feel free to take your time to answer. I'm a bit busy afk as well, so no worry but thanks for the heads up.)

First of all I want to point out that I'm not straight out denying that the problematic post is dog whistling.

But I think this calls for some metadiscussion to minimise misconceptions, I don't want to make any assumptions on our shared views and terminology, that tends to create problems further along the discussion.

So here are some statements that I just want to check we both agree with.

1) Dog whistling is using a specific expression to signal a specific view without expressing that view itself. Often used to express problematic views.

2) Sealioning is the constant argumentation of something not for the sake of a good dialogue, but for the sake of derailing the discussion and/or wear out the person engaged with. Often using fallacies and provoking the person engaged with. (Ok, this might not be the perfect definition, if you've got a good one feel free to provide it.)

3) The initial problematic post is a straw man attack, and possible a red herring. (which might very well be used for sealioning)

I think we should start from there, so we don't engage in further misconceptions about each others viewpoints. We can then further discuss the subject if you wish.