If you write an article about something that happened in the past, there is a good chance that there will be people who think that you should give Spain back the Silver Fleet . If you write an article about ‘foreigners’, then you have apparently said that all inhabitants of all 195 countries are allowed to come to the Netherlands and are entitled to any kind of benefit. And if someone argues for the abolition of Black Pete:
‘What’s next, abolish
Christmas because midgets are going to complain about the elves? The Party for the Animals about the reindeer? united kingdom phone number librarySuppose we all start complaining about Ramadan, for example. (Personally I have nothing against it) Will there also be an adjustment that we accept?’ ( source )
Possible response
Depending on the moderation style & tone of voice of your site, you could respond to an exaggeration in detail. That always carries the risk that you become part of the discussion. You can no longer steer it. What I usually do in such cases is to bring the conversation back to the discussion. Then you could invite the commenter to write a piece of their own:
‘What the author writes about is, … If you want to respond to [..], you are more than welcome to marketing list submit an article as well.’
You could expand on such a
response by showing understanding for the commenter’s feelings. That depends very much on what are micro and macro conversions? your assessment of who the commenter is.
tinfoil hat conspiracy photolia
Image courtesy of Fotolia.The discussion is
3. Conspiracy theories
A reasonable commentator raises a conspiracy theory to stir up the discussion even further. Where does the author work? And who finances him? And what about the subject? Aren’t the Russians/ Israelis/ Americans/ .. (fill in the blank) behind it? Such a contribution often starts with: ‘The real reason that…’