“Should I Take the Bait?” is a brief article which analyzes the arguments, for and against, responding to the ancient traditions of flamebaiting,¹⁾ trolling, ragebaiting, or whatever it's called now. Please be aware that this article does not intend to provide a definitive stance or solution.

The arguments for taking the bait is that failure to respond would gradually result in a 'consensus crack' where certain ideas become accepted without an opposition, but this is only worthwhile if the community in question has actual moderation.²⁾ As a result, the logical conclusion is 'mob justice' or 'vigilantism', though you can only do so much to cowards hiding behind computer screens (e.g. receipts,³⁾ public humiliation, etc.).

The arguments against taking the bait relies on that old 'do not feed the troll' mantra, or 'deny recognition', since it's often *believed* that responses will encourage this behavior. You can easily reply with a lame quip, clapback, dunk, roast, or one-liner, as if you were in a poorly scripted drama, but doing so will amplify the troll's reach and visibility since, on most platforms, you'd be dragging your followers in too.⁴⁾

It doesn't help that bad faith arguments and disingenuity are 'incentivized' since angry people tend to stay on longer to argue which, in turn, allows capitalists to profit off your rage through advertisement revenue. This shouldn't be a surprise when troll farms and ragebaiting have been unusually profitable, which also explains why society, as a whole, feels a lot more irritable. Just remember to pick your battles, or log off.

• If you're a Christian or Judaist, take note that Proverbs 26:4-5 does argue against taking the bait, though keep in mind that applying religion to the internet is already an extremely tall task.