For those that don’t know, steelmanning is the opposite of strawmanning.
It means re-stating your opponent’s view in a manner that they agree “yes, that is my view” and only then you express why you disagree with it.
Failure to do so means one of two things: either you don’t actually understand the stance you claim to oppose or you’re not even in the business of finding truth and changing minds to begin with.
Not sure if this is actually unpopular, but it didn’t feel like a showerthought either.
I get the problem of people on Lemmy asking for an explanation on why something exists or why people see something a certain way and take being able to explain it as agreeing to it.