4 HN users recommended this commentary3 months2017–2025score 4.5
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
HN recommends the series for explaining the tactics and mentality of bad-faith online arguments.
Innuendo Studios' video from the Alt-Right Playbook series on how bad-faith actors control the conversation through debate tactics and moving goalposts.
“I found it enormously helpful to understand the mentality and tactics of a group that kind of doesn't make any sense.” (HN, 2021)
The problem is you're implicitly assuming this (and other recent "culture war topics" is actually about reasoning and legitimate attempt at debate. It isn't. This is about controlling narratives and reframing offensive goals so they become a legitimate political opinion. Most of these calls for a "debate" are not trying to actually debate anything. They are trying to make enough confusing noise and repeat their talking points as often as possible. For a much better explanation of how this works - and why it's a trap which educated, well meaning, politically-interested people seem to be particularly vulnerable - see this short video essay: [this video]
Explains how culture war debate calls aim to control narratives
The alt-right playbook ( [this video] ) is a great summary of common experiences with this sort of cancer online. It's next to impossible to engage with these people for rational debate, when all they care about is spreading their hatred and ignorance through the virality of the internet, rendering pointless any civil discussion by arguing in bad faith.
Before this gets too far I’d just like to point out that anyone arguing this is an issue of free speech or “first they came for x, who’s next” is not arguing in good faith.. I’ve noticed a pattern of moving the goal post. The problem here is an insurrection and the loss of 5 American lives. Arguing there is not advantageous, easy, or particularly strong so the goal post moves to free speech leaving what happened at the capitol off the table. I really enjoy the series on YouTube “the alt right playbook”. [this video] This one is applicable here
Series on moving goalposts and bad-faith arguments
A channel called Innuendo Studios chronicles this tactic and many others in a series called The Alt-Right Playbook [1]. I found it enormously helpful to understand the mentality and tactics of a group that kind of doesn't make any sense. [1] The Alt-Right Playbook: Control the Conversation - [this video]
Chronicles tactics and mentality of alt-right groups
Why do libel and slander laws exist when someone can just debunk any lies told about them? And then the next lie, and the next one, and so on... [this video]
Cited on how lies are endlessly repeated and rebutted
Ah, I see. You ignore my question and answer as if I had asked a different one more to your liking. [this video] I suppose this could be considered a type of gish galloping too. [link]
> Agenda setting power > platform power The Alt-Right Playbook feels like a bummer version of XKCD for these discussions: [Control the Conversation]( [this video] )
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed
7 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more
Citations, criticism and jokes