> The thing that gets me about “virtue signalling” is this built-in assumption that no one does anything earnestly, and that every action is performed according to how it’ll be received.

This is because the people who use the term 'virtue signalling' consider morality to be transactional and cannot comprehend the idea that someone might actually be virtuous or have moral standards beyond which they will not tread. The term itself has now become its own 'virtue signal' to people who hold a particular viewpoint.

No one here said that not a single person in the world doesn't do it just to feel good inside but any person that shares this stuff on any kind social platform clearly does it because they crave approval from others.

Aren't you simply signalling your own moral purity by projecting the accusation back onto an accuser, as though it were a league table of moral status?

There was a time when one had to actually do things to be virtuous.