5 ms·
So while I understand your sentiment I actually have to respectfully disagree. There's a difference between calling an argument foolish and calling a person fo
by msandford 10y ago
So while I understand your sentiment I actually have to respectfully disagree. There's a difference between calling an argument foolish and calling a person foolish.
"Comparing this to a minor inconvenience is intellectually dishonest" <- rough paraphrasing of the comment
vs
"I read what you wrote, you are intellectually dishonest" <- a true attack against a person
The comment may not have been terribly civil (and that's a good reason for criticism) but I honestly don't see it as name calling.
- shortimer 10y agoThe guideline doesn't say "don't call people names"; they say "don't call names." Here's the text: When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names. E.g. "That is idiotic; 1 + 1 is 2, not 3" can be shortened to "1 + 1 is 2, not 3."
- Baeocystin 10y agoThat is my point of view as well. I changed it to your paraphrasing, though.
- dang 10y ago'Intellectually dishonest' is still name-calling in the sense of being a generic pejorative that adds no information. So it still breaks that guideline. As shortimer pointed out, it isn't about personal attacks. Personal attacks are certainly not ok here, but other things are not ok too. The guideline contains practical advice for how to edit the name-calling out of these things: simply shorten them. In this case, "Comparing X to Y is intellectually dishonest [or asinine]" can be shortened to "X is not Y".
- Baeocystin 10y agoIs there a rate limit on editing? I can no longer change my post, but I will keep this in mind. [edit] - Appreciated.
- dang 10y agoThere is (2 hours) but I'll turn it off that post above.
- msandford 10y agoAh, that makes much more sense then! Thanks for the clarification.