My main beef with how some posters' couch their positions is that they desperately try to blow any rebuttal out of the water to the point of strictly accentuating the positives for their standpoint and the negatives for anybody else's standpoint.
Point and case, as a concrete example:
In comparing Galchenyuk and Domi after the trade, we have posters depicting the trade as trading away a 30-goal scorer for a 9-Goal scorer.
When questioned about the numbers, we are told that we are talking about Galchenyuk's potential, but we are still hand-picking the worst season for max Domi as a comparable.
This just lacks any sort of credibility, IMO. It unnecessarily creates friction.
It's not like anyone would deny that Galchenyuk is more of a natural scorer than Domi in the first place. The argument that losing scorers on a team that has trouble scoring is also a sound argument that is hard to deny. So, why stack the argument unnecessarily and falsely in favour of the point you are trying to make?
It's really annoying, especially considering that the argument would hold up without this.