Nothing makes me angrier than people telling me I don't mean what I say or that I am criticising a strawman. I do well with disagreement but not with people who won't accept I mean what I say or that I'm confused or dishonest about what I am and am not criticising.

It doesn't matter if they're polite. The question 'Aren't you just criticising a strawman?" is bound to be annoying to anyone who is sincere. It is possible that I have genuinely misunderstood something & am criticising it incorrectly & if so, you can show me this.

I myself know that I am not deliberately misrepresenting a problem in order to make it easier to attack, so you can't ask me if I am politely anymore than I could say "Thanks for your response. Is it possible you are a lying scumbag who buggers sheep?"

Civility in conversation isn't just about saying 'please' and 'thank you.' It's also about assuming the other person to be sincere & well-intended. Of course, there are times when you have to say "I think you're being dishonest" but then the conversation is over.

There really isn't a polite way to tell someone you think they are being dishonest & it ends the conversation so it really shouldn't be said casually & then the other person be expected to continue talking to you.

I think people sometimes don't realise when they are accusing someone else of being dishonest rather than mistaken, but sentences like: "You are constructing a strawman," "You are being hypocritical" & "That's just empty rhetoric" are making that accusation.

If you believe someone else to be attacking an enemy that doesn't actually exist, you can still be charitable & assume this is an error by saying something like: I'm not convinced that problem really exists or is very common. Why do you think it does?

If you see someone being inconsistent in their principles, you don't need to go straight to "You are a hypocrite" but could say "This seems inconsistent with what you said here." We can all be inconsistent without realising it & can admit this if framed this way.

Someone who has been made aware of an inconsistency in their principles can answer "Hmm. Maybe it is. I will need to give this more thought." That's rarer than we'd like to see but less rare than "Yes, I am, in fact, a hypocrite. Let's continue this excellent conversation."

I have recently been accused of "word salad", "gish-gallop" & "empty rhetoric" but they could actually have said "Could you clarify?" & "Can you slow down a bit? That's a lot of information all at once." & "I'm not getting your point. Could you state it very clearly?"

Rather than accusing me of not actually meaning anything. I know that I do mean something, but I can express it better if I am told what the barrier to communication is & how I can remove it.