I don't think I'm either, I'm more of a listener? I am not a skilled debater. So I know I need to listen or read about issues if I'm bothered by them. I'm not one who demeans others either. But I do notice those who are demeaning to others "virtue" rather than stating facts. They get angry when presented with contrary opinions or facts. I notice that. What I feel disqualifies me the most is that I can see two opposing people who are tied to their beliefs whether it's fact based or not. I prefer facts, I do believe --Facts do lead to people drawing conclusions. Ideally two people having a discussion/debate would both be using facts to support their ideas. Ideally, listeners would be able to make decisions based on what they morally feel about the facts. Ideally both "debating" parties would still respect differences. I am less of a debater because I don't have "facts" to quote. But I try not to blow off or demean others just because I disagree with them. If I had a strong memory, and strong oral skills, thicker skin, I would choose to be a debator.

Virtue signaler.

Because I have TRIED discussion with far left wing liberals on this site...REALLY gave it my best shot...and became utterly and completely exhausted. It was like being talked to death by someone who was fundamentally WRONG, and the winner was the one who could last the longest. It was NEVER me.

To my shame, I ended up blocking the worst of them. I can't even PRETEND that I want a good discussion anymore, with someone who disagrees. Yes, I have heard all the yada-yada-yada about echo chambers...but I am too damned TIRED for all of that.

I DO listen to opinions opposite mine, on the news...but thank GOD I don't have to engage with those people.

I'm a master debater.

A little bit of both lol

I’ve always said there are only two types of people in the world. Deal makers and deal breakers. Now I need to consider this alternative 🤔

I don't really debate much I say what I believe in and if people don't agree with it that's their prerogative.
That doesn't mean I won't listen to other ideas and facts trump whatever I believe.
Too many people think an opinion equals a fact.
That's happened a long time and so I'm not surprised by it, but what I'm increasingly surprised with is when you state a fact with no religious or political language attached to it people start to fight with you on religious and political grounds.
They imagine you're on the opposite side of the political debate even when you declared no political opinion whatsoever.

It is very spiritually truncating because the person spends their time hitting their virtue button all the time.

This makes them blind to the need for personal growth.

So, basically, "virtue signallers" are narcissists; and no brighter than they should be?

I like to think I can debate, to try to understand the other's point of view; though of course I do have strong views on some things.

How do you decide who is a "virtue signaller"?

The two posts you recently made about the families of former American presidents did not obviously invite debate.