I want to give a shout out to ProSense.

[Maven]

174. With almost 80,000 posts since 2005

(seriously, how DOES one person amass that many?) I'm sure you can find specific examples. Some have already been provided in this thread, specifically with regard to her attempts to smear liberal journalists with whom she disagrees.

But among her usual tactics, some of the greatest hits are:

1) The collateral issue - focus on "winning" a tangential point that was never raised or is irrelevant to the larger issue, in order to create the appearance of winning on the larger issue

2) The emphasis game - examples of this can be found in this thread. Excerpt a column and then bold items to create a deceptive impression of the author's message, or, alternatively, juxtapose other articles that may be wholly unrelated to create the appearance of support for a column she is promoting

3) The avalanche of links - rather self-explanatory. Create the impression of factual support for a proposition by barraging skeptics with a litany of "evidence" in support, which may or may not be relevant

4) The showdown - keep responding forever until you tire out an opponent, making it look like you've "won" the point. Or, alternatively, get your opponent's thread locked.

5) The nitpick - dispute a detail in your opponent's post to undermine the credibility of an otherwise valid point being made.

I'm sure others can think of more.