Maybe?

I guess at this point, I think we've probably long since surpassed a saturation point. For anyone who could be shamed into change have been. For everyone who may see someone being shamed, they've already seen it.

And, for the relatively small number of people who are perhaps reaching an age where it might matter, is there a concern that they won't be exposed to it if one person (say you) don't run that M.O?

Being a loud angry voice is so... Easy. People convince themselves that roasting libtards or trumpets is somehow critical. Like, as if it's what is keeping the other side in check. As if the hatred isn't just a self-sustaining perpetual hate machine.

I'm honestly not that interested in that line of thinking.

I'm more interested in trying to understand people like Daryl Davis. That looks HARD... But actually results in actual positive outcomes.

Anything I think is preferable to just maintaining the status quo, teetering on a knifes edge where the stakes keep getting higher but the stalemate of which way things will break remains. I think it's too important to do the "easy" thing if the easy thing isn't likely to result in significant positive change