I think you're talking about "The Gentleman's Guide to Forum Spies[0]" Which for some reason people seem to believe is actually a CIA/Fed document leaked to pastebin (and somehow left there) despite having clearly being written for and within the imageboard community.
Most of what's listed as "disinfo agent" tactics there are the general fallacious and bad faith tactics that go on in almost any forum under heated discourse.
This is pretty similar, though the specific one I am thinking of is an image of a "scanned document" and seems to be more focused around workplace. But this is similar enough that it gave me better search terms to find what I was thinking of[0]. I'm not really convinced that this is a legitimate CIA or FBI document but the post I found it under claims it is a "1940s CIA memo on how to sow dysfunction in an infiltrated organization" and I've seen it many times floating around with similar titles.
But yeah, I fully agree that this is essentially about bad faith tactics. My new strategy to dealing with this is to call these people out on their bad faith rather than engaging in the misdirection that they are creating. At least in my experience it seems to push these conversations down from the top spot (but that may be a selection bias).
It reminds me of that "CIA manual" that floats around about how to derail conversations and sew doubt when infuriating an organization (can't find link). About doing things like bringing up irrelevant information, highlighting less meaningful things, revisiting already solved problems, etc. I mean what did the GGP do besides say "_I_ knew about this, but you all called me a conspiracy theorist! Who's laughing now?" What good does such a statement do? Clearly they are following the CIA handbook and derailing the conversation! (I'm joking)
But I think it comes down to not wanting to read the entire article _AND_ process the information contained within. I think a lot of people read things for the words written and not for the meaning, and I find this odd.