Definitions by Abzugal
Flatposting
A goalpost‑moving tactic that demands the target “prove” they are not like Flat Earthers. The perpetrator sets impossible standards of proof—often requiring the target to address absurd hypotheticals or to disavow views they never held. When the target refuses to engage with the ridiculous framing, the flatposter declares that their silence proves the comparison is apt. Flatposting is a way to force opponents into defending against nonsense, wasting their energy while appearing to have made a substantive point.
Example: “He demanded she explain why her theory wasn’t like believing the Earth is flat. When she ignored the troll, he posted ‘see, she can’t defend her ideas.’ Flatposting: forcing your opponent to argue against a straw man.”
Flatposting by Abzugal April 1, 2026
Flatlighting
A form of Digitallighting that uses the “Flat Earth” analogy to gaslight targets into believing their ideas are obviously ridiculous. The perpetrator repeatedly compares the target’s position to Flat Earth theory, often in public spaces, until the target begins to feel that they must be missing something obvious. Even when the target’s ideas are well‑supported, the constant association with a stigmatized belief erodes their confidence. Flatlighting weaponizes social conformity to silence dissent.
Example: “Every time she cited peer‑reviewed research, he posted ‘Flat Earth logic.’ After weeks, she started editing her posts more carefully, wondering if she was being irrational—flatlighting, using mockery to undermine certainty.”
Flatlighting by Abzugal April 1, 2026
Flatsplaining
A form of Digitalsplaining where the perpetrator dismisses any argument by comparing it to Flat Earth belief—a culturally accepted symbol of irrationality. The flatsplainer says “this is literally the Flat Earth of X” or “you sound like a Flat Earther,” regardless of whether the comparison is apt. The goal is to trigger an emotional association that bypasses rational engagement. By equating the target’s position with a universally ridiculed belief, the flatsplainer makes any further discussion seem absurd.
Example: “She proposed a novel interpretation of archaeological data; he replied ‘this is the Flat Earth of archaeology.’ Flatsplaining: using a rhetorical shortcut to avoid actual debate.”
Flatsplaining by Abzugal April 1, 2026
Conspiposting
A goalpost‑moving tactic that demands the target “prove” that a certain event or pattern is not a conspiracy theory, often by requiring impossible standards of proof (e.g., “show me the memo where they admitted it”). When the target provides evidence, the goalposts shift to “anyone can fake documents.” The real aim is to keep the target endlessly proving their sanity, while the accuser never has to engage with the substance. Conspiposting is often used in debates about historical abuses, government secrecy, and corporate malfeasance.
Example: “She presented declassified documents; he said ‘anyone can forge those.’ She provided archival records; he said ‘conspiracy theorists always find something.’ Conspiposting: demanding proof while refusing to accept any.”
Conspiposting by Abzugal April 1, 2026
Conspilighting
A form of Digitallighting that uses the label “conspiracy theorist” to gaslight targets into doubting their own research and judgment. The perpetrator repeatedly tells the target that they are “paranoid,” “seeing patterns that aren’t there,” or “falling for disinformation.” Even when the target presents documented evidence, the accusation is repeated until the target begins to question whether their research is credible. Conspilighting leverages the social stigma associated with “conspiracy” to isolate and silence.
Example: “She provided government documents, whistleblower testimony, and media reports; he responded only with ‘conspiracy theorist.’ Months later, she wondered if she was being irrational—conspilighting, making the truth feel like delusion.”
Conspilighting by Abzugal April 1, 2026
Conspisplaining
A form of Digitalsplaining where the perpetrator “explains” that the target’s ideas are “conspiracy theories” and that the target is a “conspiracy theorist.” The term is used as a thought‑stopping label, implying that any investigation into power, secrecy, or unofficial narratives is inherently irrational. Conspisplaining ignores that many “conspiracy theories” later turned out to be true (e.g., MK‑ULTRA, Tuskegee). It functions to delegitimize inquiry by associating it with stigma, without engaging the evidence.
Example: “When she questioned official narratives about a chemical spill, he replied with a thread ‘explaining’ that she was a conspiracy theorist. Conspisplaining: using a label to shut down legitimate questions.”
Conspisplaining by Abzugal April 1, 2026
Conposting
A goalpost‑moving and proofposting tactic focused on proving that the target is a “con artist.” The perpetrator demands financial disclosures, tax records, or impossible accounts of where every dollar goes, then declares that any lack of transparency (or any transparency that shows income) as proof of fraud. Conposting sets a trap: if the target is unpaid, they are accused of “working for exposure”; if they charge anything, they are accused of profiteering. The real goal is to exhaust and discredit.
Example: “She published her budget; he demanded receipts for every expense. When she provided them, he said ‘look how much she made.’ Conposting: moving the goalposts from ‘show us’ to ‘you’re making money.’”
Conposting by Abzugal April 1, 2026