3 ms·

If I was being accused of argument ad hominem, I would take that as an insult too that since it's a fallacy in thinking. My comment was providing lessons on th

If I was being accused of argument ad hominem, I would take that as an insult too that since it's a fallacy in thinking. My comment was providing lessons on the levels of reasoning used to downvote along the lines of pg's essay on the levels of argument. Feel free to offer more levels or refinements/replacements for the reason to downvote, I started the first two levels, somebody else followed up with another couple levels. I think they ran roughly parallel to pg's essay in terms of the lowest level being the lowest form of downvote, the next higher level being slightly more sophisticated, and so on. People want to just use the downvote to be contrary without having to deal with the consequences of being contrary. It's passive-aggressiveness at its worst.

jodrellblank 17y ago
> If I was being accused of argument ad hominem Which you were, because you were attacking downvoters personally instead of their use of the downvote system. > I would take that as an insult too that since it's a fallacy in thinking. You are free to take whatever you like as an insult, but if you take a fallacy in my thinking as an insult you're going to spend most of your life feeling insulted and that seems like a silly way to choose to live. > I started the first two levels, somebody else followed up with another couple levels. I see; I thought you were offering an exhaustive list rather than the beginnings of a list. > People want to just use the downvote to be contrary without having to deal with the consequences of being contrary. Can you back that up with anything? What 'consequences' should there be to downvoting things you don't want to see on a site built to be shaped by the voting of people who are present?
- elblanco 17y ago
  > Which you were, because you were attacking downvoters personally instead of their use of the downvote system. Fair enough. > I see; I thought you were offering an exhaustive list rather than the beginnings of a list. Perhaps I should have followed with some ellipses "..." > Can you back that up with anything? What 'consequences' should there be to downvoting things you don't want to see on a site built to be shaped by the voting of people who are present? The suppression of dissenting and contradictory voices. A comment like "downvoted because I disagree with your point about ..." creates value by focusing discussion on a particular area of interest. While just a downvote supplies nothing meaningful to the discussion and merely seeks to suppress some viewpoint in the most general sense. A definition of discussion is "an exchange of views on some topic", suppressing alternate viewpoints does not lend itself to creating discussion.

jodrellblank 17y ago

> If I was being accused of argument ad hominem Which you were, because you were attacking downvoters personally instead of their use of the downvote system. > I would take that as an insult too that since it's a fallacy in thinking. You are free to take whatever you like as an insult, but if you take a fallacy in my thinking as an insult you're going to spend most of your life feeling insulted and that seems like a silly way to choose to live. > I started the first two levels, somebody else followed up with another couple levels. I see; I thought you were offering an exhaustive list rather than the beginnings of a list. > People want to just use the downvote to be contrary without having to deal with the consequences of being contrary. Can you back that up with anything? What 'consequences' should there be to downvoting things you don't want to see on a site built to be shaped by the voting of people who are present?

elblanco 17y ago
> Which you were, because you were attacking downvoters personally instead of their use of the downvote system. Fair enough. > I see; I thought you were offering an exhaustive list rather than the beginnings of a list. Perhaps I should have followed with some ellipses "..." > Can you back that up with anything? What 'consequences' should there be to downvoting things you don't want to see on a site built to be shaped by the voting of people who are present? The suppression of dissenting and contradictory voices. A comment like "downvoted because I disagree with your point about ..." creates value by focusing discussion on a particular area of interest. While just a downvote supplies nothing meaningful to the discussion and merely seeks to suppress some viewpoint in the most general sense. A definition of discussion is "an exchange of views on some topic", suppressing alternate viewpoints does not lend itself to creating discussion.