4 ms·

Microsoft antagonists tend to generate very fuzzy and imprecise opinions. They are akin to conspiracy theorist, and like the religious you can almost never narr

Microsoft antagonists tend to generate very fuzzy and imprecise opinions. They are akin to conspiracy theorist, and like the religious you can almost never narrow them down to a specific objective thing. You will argue with concrete-objective facts and they will reply with generalities and feelings. Its a pattern -> learn to recognise it.

woodman 10y ago
> ...you can almost never narrow them down... That might be because the "antagonists" are motivated by something more complex than whatever bulletpoint you're focused on... like the concept of free software. Try to think of an elevator pitch for it, now imagine how that would hold up in an adversarial debate where your interlocutor likens you to a "conspiracy theorist" or "the religious". > Its a pattern -> learn to recognise it. Yes, you've perfectly demonstrated the association fallacy, learn to recognize it.
- dagaci 10y ago
  If you point out to a football team supporter, that what constitutes their team is always in flux. Player's change, managers change, staffs change, owners change, uniforms change. Sometimes even grounds change and names even change <- objective facts! You will rarely be able to dimmish that persons passion and feeling for that team or convince them that the other team isn't as bad as they feel it is. :)
  - woodman 10y ago
    I don't think any further examples of the association fallacy are necessary. Isn't it obvious that such analogies are debate tools, not useful in actual conversation? Do you expect someone to further the conversation about FreeBSD preference by defending sports fans?
    - dagaci 10y ago
      \1 I don't think you really know what association fallacy means. You conflate "analogy" with "association fallacy". \2 Also this thread is not about FreeBSD preference, neither is the topic > the topic is about Microsoft supporting FreeBSD in the cloud.
      - woodman 10y ago
        > \1 I think you have below average reading comprehension. Adjacent sentences aren't necessarily conflated concepts. > \2 Not football?

woodman 10y ago

> ...you can almost never narrow them down... That might be because the "antagonists" are motivated by something more complex than whatever bulletpoint you're focused on... like the concept of free software. Try to think of an elevator pitch for it, now imagine how that would hold up in an adversarial debate where your interlocutor likens you to a "conspiracy theorist" or "the religious". > Its a pattern -> learn to recognise it. Yes, you've perfectly demonstrated the association fallacy, learn to recognize it.

dagaci 10y ago
If you point out to a football team supporter, that what constitutes their team is always in flux. Player's change, managers change, staffs change, owners change, uniforms change. Sometimes even grounds change and names even change <- objective facts! You will rarely be able to dimmish that persons passion and feeling for that team or convince them that the other team isn't as bad as they feel it is. :)
- woodman 10y ago
  I don't think any further examples of the association fallacy are necessary. Isn't it obvious that such analogies are debate tools, not useful in actual conversation? Do you expect someone to further the conversation about FreeBSD preference by defending sports fans?
  - dagaci 10y ago
    \1 I don't think you really know what association fallacy means. You conflate "analogy" with "association fallacy". \2 Also this thread is not about FreeBSD preference, neither is the topic > the topic is about Microsoft supporting FreeBSD in the cloud.
    - woodman 10y ago
      > \1 I think you have below average reading comprehension. Adjacent sentences aren't necessarily conflated concepts. > \2 Not football?