Please don't ...
Argue with people based solely on information that they provided to you
The Fact Denier's interactions go a little something like this:
Ughhhhhhhhh. I cannot properly describe how much this frustrates me.
If you weren't there, then you have no choice but to accept the version of events presented to you by the witnesses. You can push against that story a little bit, asking things like "is it possible that ______," but you can't just outright argue with the person presenting the story because you are coming from a place of literally zero knowledge.
If someone describes a situation to you and you picture it differently from how it really happened, then guess what -- YOU ARE WRONG. If I tell you a story about how yesterday the sky looked like this:
and you picture this:
... then you can't start f***ing arguing with me about what the sky looked like. Because you weren't there, you don't know, and you're just arguing to argue because you're overly confrontational and I hate you.
People who take a self-deprecating joke as an opportunity to actually insult you
F*** YOU, SNOOTY BITCH.
This is a lesson many people still have yet to learn: if someone makes a joke at their own expense, that shows that they don't take themselves too seriously and are willing to be the butt of the joke if it gets a laugh out of others. If you take this olive branch they're handing you and use it slap them across the face with a rude comment, then you're just an asshole.
God do I ever hate people who use self-deprecating humor as an 'in' to say something bitchy.
God I hate you so f***ing much right now.
People who are so keen on opposing you that they will argue in favor of an indefensible viewpoint, simply because it is opposite to yours
Barb says: washing your hands after pooping in a public bathroom is totally optional.
(no it's not. Wash your goddamned hands you pig)
Barb says: it's not rude to let the door slam into the person behind you instead of holding it.
(yes it is. Hold the goddamned door)
Barb says: it's okay to kick dogs.
(no it's not. Do not kick animals unless they are actively attacking you)
Have you ever known someone like this? They've decided they dislike you, or they think you're an idiot, and so they have to disagree with every single thing you say? You could tell them the sky was blue and they'd have a problem with it.
My favorite thing about these people is how easy it is to troll them, though. Just invent a situation where no sane person could possibly disagree with you -- "some guy was texting while driving and he crashed into my car and injured me! What an asshole!" "Some teenager just spit on the barista's face at Starbucks because he messed up her order!" -- and then watch The Opposer try to find a way to be on the other guy's side. It's like a ballet.
A ballet of idiocy.
Assume that everyone is a hypocrite in every situation
Interactions with The Assumer always go something like this:
This jackass operates under the assumption that you've never heard of karma, the Golden Rule, or general human decency. They therefore believe that if others behaved towards you in the exact same manner that you behave towards them, you would be angry.
This assumption is, of course, based on absolutely nothing. You've never given any indication that you're the kind of person who gets up in arms over dumb shit ... so why does The Assumer think you are? Because The Assumer is an idiot, that's why.
Generally speaking, if someone, say, doesn't believe in tipping, then odds are that they neither tip others nor expect to be tipped themselves. If someone never uses their car blinker, then they probably don't expect other people to use their blinkers, either.
Plenty of people are hypocrites, and it's fun to call those people out. But not everyone is, and certainly not in every situation. So if you recognize a bit of yourself in The Assumer, then kindly shut the f*** up because you're stupid and I hate you.
Ah. I feel better now. Carry on, friends. :-)