[fhaltmayer]

The terraform changes just seem so unprofessional and a prime example of virtue-signaling.

[pavlov]

I agree about it being unprofessional. But does "virtue signalling" now mean simply any form of protest?

Were the Canadian truckers protesting in Ottawa virtue signalling? Are people posting "Let's Go Brandon" online also virtue signalling? If not, what's the difference between their form of protest and this Terraform stunt?

[asoneth]

My understanding is that "virtue signaling" implies that the primary goal is performative with minimal personal risk and minimal commitment to productive action. The example that comes to mind is a company that spends far more money informing the public of their charitable works than they do on the works themselves.

So an in-person march, trucker protest, sit-ins, having a private conversation, calling your representative, making personal sacrifices, attempting to bring attention to lesser-known issues, donating money, engaging in dialog to convince someone of your position, etc would not be virtue signaling.

But things like posting "Let's Go Brandon" online, or changing your profile picture with no further action, or unironically using terms like "virtue signaling" for internet points might qualify as virtue signaling.

[JulianChastain]

The goals/motivations of the action is what matters here. Changing a few lines of code to state your stance on an issue won't cause any level of change whatsoever. It was clearly done to show which side of the war the author supported, more about the author than the conflict. A Canadian protestor that spent most of the time publishing their involvement on social media is virtue signaling, but one that merely occupied the capital is not. Saying "Let's go Brandon" is virtue signaling, unless the signal is meant only for your group, then it is dog whistling

[sharkjacobs]

If you support a cause, "virtue signal" describes an action which doesn't do a lot to materially support the cause, to encourage people to take more concrete action.

If you oppose a cause, "virtue signal" is a term of denigration for any public action on behalf of the cause to discourage people showing support for it.

[BuyMyBitcoins]

My personal sense of the word is that “virtue signaling” is when people intentionally seek recognition from a group by visibly supporting something that group already endorses or considers normal. Going a step further, the support is often exaggerated, not totally sincere, or not congruent with that person’s previous behavior.

There is also a sense that whatever thing someone is “virtue signaling” about is acceptable enough that there is no real downside for taking the stance.

It would be like an American proudly declaring how much he loves the United States on Independence Day. He would go out of his way to emphasize just how much of a patriot he is, hoping to be rewarded for doing so.

[teddyh]

I believe “virtue signalling” means any form of protest which will not, and does not really try to, have any actual effect on that which it protests against. Any small actor protesting and boycotting something which they are unlikely to affect and even come into contact with, therefore qualifies. The protest is not done to affect any real change, only to signal virtue.

[tomjen3]

When you protest something not because you care, but in order to signal that you care it is virtual signal (literally, you are trying to signal your virtue).

When you protest for gay rights in 2020 it is a virtue signal. When you protest for gay rights in 1987, it is because you believe in it and are willing to take the cost of it.

Since public trade companies only care about money, when those companies support some course it has become safe enough that it is now virtue signalling.

[_jal]

> If not, what's the difference

Political valence. It is a term a certain flavor of culture warrior likes to employ in attempts to devalue public statements by their opponents.

[kodah]

I think people virtue signal when they dominate conversation with pet political topics. This is especially evident if they continually find non-sequitur ways to include moral and pet topics in regular conversation. I don't think that either of the examples you've brought up are virtue signaling, but introducing the topic of Starbucks cups to redirect a conversation into how "the country has lost its way" is a good example. An example of this on the left is how certain folks will redirect any conversation into one about oppression.

The impact of virtue signalling is pretty evident. Ever seen how in order to make a statement on something you have to first identify yourself as part of that something that you're criticising? That's a direct byproduct of virtue signaling.

More or less, it's a form of manipulation.

[LudwigNagasena]

I think it means something like grandstanding and slacktivism.

[McP]

Accusing people of virtue signalling is a prime example of virtue-signaling.

But really I don't know your motivations and you don't know the motivations of the Terraform folks. Let's be a bit more humble please. But yes, I also find it unprofessional.