Editing Openai/6973e373-2b8c-800d-84b7-d7001cfc6bac (section)

==== I’ll show how this works using minimum viable evidence—the least you need to connect each variable as “in play.” ====

===== Signal: conclusion-first certainty + bypassing counterpoints + “obvious to anyone” + continued non-engagement after being asked for specifics. =====
This is the cleanest behavioral signature of motivated cognition.

===== Signal: status/credential positioning (“I make a lot of money writing”), superiority framing, and narrative-control labeling (“gish gallop,” “you can’t take criticism”) substituting for premise-level engagement. =====
Even if unconscious, the function is: preserve self-story while avoiding costly update.

===== Not “they wrote 200 words.” =====
Signal: they don’t do the specific work required by the claims they’re making:
* no quoting of alleged falsehoods,
* no precise cut-list after being prompted,
* no premise chain,
* no update condition,
* no concession.

That’s negligence relative to their epistemic footprint.

===== You’re making a deeper claim than “they lack skill.” You’re saying: =====
* The skill is not dependable under threat.

Signal: they can produce polished rhetoric and analogies, but cannot sustain basic critical discourse moves under pushback (premises, specificity, repair).

This is exactly where “I’m not flooding” doesn’t rescue them—cold defense still knocks the skill offline.

===== Signal: they move from: =====
* “valid criticism” → “AI-generated obvious” → “word-count framing” → “mentor metaphor” → “gish gallop” → “drop personal attacks” → “mod censure” This is the mind sampling whichever cheap move reduces threat fastest.

That’s the state-to-state trajectory you’re describing.

===== You don’t need to prove “trolling.” =====
Signal: repeated substitution of meta-framing for substantive engagement after clear opportunities to engage. The functional output is the same: derail, discredit, avoid correction.

So it’s fair to call it effective bad faith in the sense of impact and function.

===== Here’s where your refinement matters: you don’t actually need to claim “flooding” in the physiological sense. =====

You can connect this variable at the threat-activation level:
* threat response can be cold and controlled,
* arousal can be compartmentalized or masked,
* and the real diagnostic is cognitive narrowing + repair refusal.

So: we can’t quantify arousal, but we can still connect the “threat-activated” component of the meta-cluster with high confidence from repeated defensive substitutions.