The Nazi Bar is not all or nothing - the more people active and vocal about it, the stronger the detterence. And in any case, it has to start with SOMEONE.

Good luck to you as well, and thanks for the effort you've put in here!

The wedge issue point is good if you can break through the "but how does it affect you?" barrier - a lot of people have been convinced that Something Bad (tm) will happen if The Gay Agenda wins. You target them there, because that's where there's no good answer.

It's always been weird to try and argue with someone who doesn't believe in the validity of the scientific community or scientific results. I think maybe I just need to start being like "OK, if you don't trust the science, what is specifically wrong with it in the articles that I linked?," or otherwise challenge for positive proof. That's not a bad idea, actually - to just clearly state that saying "the modern science our society is built on is untrustworthy" is a positive claim that shifts the burden of proof onto the person who's trying to reject it, because the default is acceptance.

(Part 2 because it's over the character limit)
Facts work if they're genuinely receptive and not just leading you along to continue in debate pervertry. IMO for the audience I'm not entirely convinced the needle is moving for anyone who isn't already leaning left.

For the "Nazi Bar" it has to be a large majority pointing out how that behavior is unacceptable to be effective. Any time people cry "free speech" say some really horrid things, and I wish Steam actually moderated their discussion pages (or at least vetted volunteer moderators). There are many game discussion boards on Steam that their own devs appoint and moderate that are decent, and I can only hope more devs follow that approach in the future.

Regardless good luck to you and hope you can move the needle on at least one person.

A couple of other things worth mentioning that I've found effective: if the topic is about something like LGBTQ+ it's a wedge issue. Rather than them unlikely changing their view on an emotionally charged subject it's usually more effective to point out that their emotions are being used to distract from social issues that affect most. That they are being played for fools getting distracted while their working conditions remain terrible, healthcare remains a joke for most (or if you live in a country with nationalized healthcare how it's so defunded that it is near useless).

Only after challenging their views they may realize that wedge issues aren't worth getting so worked up over; that maybe LGBTQ+ deserve normal lives.

I appreciate your advice! I'm not super great at appealing to feelings - my argumentative tactic is mostly just to try and assemble a stack of overwhelming empirical evidence and then wield that like a club lol. Worth a try, I guess!

It's definitely possible that this person is unreachable, but even if that's the case having the argument has two benefits. First, even if the argument doesn't convince them, it might convince anybody else who reads it if my position is more compelling - I'm talking to the audience too. And secondly, just the act of challenging bigotry and bigotry-adjacent behavior sends the message that said forum isn't a safe space for that ideology - it helps avoid the "Nazi Bar" problem where when nobody says anything it encourages them to congregate and become more and more vocally cruel and aggressive.

That's why I tend to stick with it, even in the cases where I don't think I can reach people.

I've seen the same thread and while I appreciate your efforts the people you are trying to convince don't care about facts; we live in an age of misinformation. While they claim that it's about "your feelings getting hurt" the irony is they are speaking from their feelings only or "vibes".
They are missing an important learned life skill: empathy. Unfortunately they won't learn it over a steam discussion, and will continue their Gamergate era style of thoughts. It will take something like discovering someone they care about in their workplace being trans (it's easier to not notice trans male people and it breaks these people's brains).
Sorry for the ramble, and if I had any advice for you in the future it would be to appeal to feelings on top of providing facts. Have them question why they feel that way. I would also gently correct (they have sensitive feelings, remember) any wrong talking points they are regurgitating from think tanks.