CMX Dictionary

SNARF (Stakes/Novelty/Anger/Retention/Fear) is a term describing the type of content that dominates online platforms when AI-driven algorithms prioritize engagement

Thought-terminating clichés simplify complex issues, halting meaningful discussion. They often hinder problem-solving in online forums by shutting down diverse perspectives.

Survivorship bias occurs when decisions are based only on successful outcomes, overlooking failures. It can lead to skewed strategies in building and managing online communities.

The sunk costs fallacy occurs when people continue investing in something based on past commitments rather than future benefits. In online communities, this can lead to wasted resources on failing initiatives or outdated features.

Style over substance can create appealing visuals but risks alienating users seeking meaningful engagement. Effective forums balance visual appeal with valuable content to foster growth.

The straw man fallacy occurs when someone misrepresents another's argument to make it easier to attack. Recognizing and addressing it helps maintain productive forum discussions.

The slippery slope fallacy suggests that one small action or decision will inevitably lead to a chain of negative outcomes. In forums, this can appear in debates over moderation or policy changes.

The regression fallacy occurs when a normal fluctuation is misinterpreted as a trend or pattern. This can lead to poor decision-making in online community management.

A red herring diverts attention from the main topic, derailing discussions in forums. Recognizing and addressing it can maintain focus and clarity in community interactions.

A propositional fallacy occurs when the logical structure of an argument is flawed, leading to incorrect conclusions. Recognizing and addressing these in forums ensures productive and meaningful discussions.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a logical fallacy where a false causation is assumed between two events that occur in sequence. It can lead to misinformation and misjudgments in online communities.

Poisoning the well refers to presenting biased information to influence opinions before a discussion. It undermines fairness and can disrupt constructive dialogue in online communities.

Persuasive definitions shape community conversations by framing terms to align with specific perspectives. They can either unite members or spark debate depending on their intent.

Overwhelming exception occurs when a general rule is invalidated by numerous exceptions. In online communities, this can challenge moderators and disrupt guideline enforcement.

Nut-picking involves focusing on extreme or fringe examples to misrepresent a broader group, often leading to toxic debates. It can skew discussions and damage the inclusivity of a forum.

Non sequitur fallacies disrupt discussions by presenting conclusions that don't logically follow from the premises. Addressing these helps maintain clarity and productive debates in online communities.

The "No True Scotsman" fallacy excludes individuals from a group by redefining criteria to dismiss valid examples. This can create division and alienation in online communities.

The fallacy of a negative conclusion from affirmative premises occurs when a negative conclusion is improperly drawn from entirely positive premises, weakening the logical consistency of discussions in forums.

The naturalistic fallacy occurs when someone equates what is "natural" with what is "right," a common bias in discussions. This can derail debates in forums by conflating facts with moral judgments.

The motte-and-bailey fallacy uses vague definitions to defend indefensible claims in online debates. It can create confusion and mistrust in forum discussions.

The moralistic fallacy assumes that what is morally right should also be factually true. It can create challenges in balancing ethical ideals with the realities of online community management.

The modal fallacy occurs when people confuse what is possible with what is necessary, leading to flawed reasoning. This can skew discussions and decision-making in online forums.

Misleading vividness occurs when striking examples overshadow broader, more accurate data, influencing community discussions. This can skew the perception of issues in forums and create echo chambers.

The Masked-man fallacy arises when assumptions about identity lead to flawed reasoning. In forums, this can affect trust and decision-making.