Careful where you do debates
Quick reminder: blog authors get token rewards based on other users' activity (such as likes and comments) on their blogs. The corollary of this is that sometimes you may be unwittingly rewarding something you would not have chosen to reward had you been mindful about it.
Case in point, my own argument vs @ChrisandAmber about why his "reputation keeper" proposal for Minds is a terrible idea: https://imgur.com/a/2PJhSUv
I think I've made some good points, put him in a tight spot and revealed his lack of integrity to the audience, which is all any of us can hope to achieve when we argue online. However I happened to do it under his blog, and because of that every comment I wrote has resulted in him getting more tokens, which was the opposite of what I wanted, given the malicious agenda he is prone to spend them on.
Number chasers like him are always aware of what is going on numerically, and I say all of us should be as well. Consider carefully whether you want to 'feed' the proverbial troll by generating activity in his domain. A little mindfulness goes a long way towards keeping the troll emaciated.
Look out for these 2 techniques
1. Baiting. Some calculating individuals are likely to deliberately and thoughtfully respond to your comments in such a way as to provoke a reaction and keep you talking for as long as possible. They might not really care about your point of view or mean what they say. Sometimes you might be wasting your breath and feeding the troll (with attention AND tokens) at the same time.
2. Love bombing. This is a technique which cults use when they recruit people. In online debates some calculating people may use it in response to criticism from you, in order to get on your good side and soften your stance. Essentially it's an attempt to trade good feelings for your cooperation with their agenda, which rationally you may have good reasons to oppose. Usually this manifests in giving you compliments or showing interest in you or something related to you.
These two behaviors are sneaky and not always obvious, because they are really similar to normal ways people behave. Machiavellian personalities can, however, use these tactics deliberately to great effect. It's often a grey area and hard to tell whether or not the person is sincere - and that nuance is what makes all the difference.
When you determine that you would rather not reward the author of the blog with tokens, but you still want to start a discussion about the subject matter, consider writing your own blog about it instead ;)
EDIT: Right after I finished writing the blog, @Fishman pointed out that "only the first unique interaction with a signed in user counts". I was unaware of that, but now we all know. Thanks @Fishman! Makes the blog above somewhat inaccurate, but there are other useful ideas in it as well, so I'm going to let it stay up with this disclaimer.