Post #3778032
2026-07-13 05:03 UTC
Rage in that context doesn’t mean the full on definition, irritating or annoying are enough to qualify as the “rage” part of the term. It’s engagement bait with that as the method. The other part as someone else pointed out is the intent.
The post you allude to qualified but you were reposting it without the intent, so while the meme itself is ragebait as the original creator had the intent it only applies to you by association not directly. Most readers won’t make the distinction without knowing that’s the case.
Replies (1)
-
@CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 2026-07-13 07:48
Like I saw a post with someone asking a stupid question about a fountain. I was like how is this rage inducing like, in any way to someone who called it rage bait then they said it was due to the comments, but like… that doesn’t make the post rage bait does it? How would you know the intent based off the original question/image/whatever? I understand comments are easy but I don’t get the completely generic stuff being called rage bait without context I guess?