I can't say that I've had any formal training in rhetoric, so I can't speak to that. > ... the author is right, and should, above all, have the goal of convinc

I can't say that I've had any formal training in rhetoric, so I can't speak to that. > ... the author is right, and should, above all, have the goal of convincing the reader ... It still seems logically inconsistent to me to call that bad faith. Let me try from a different angle. In my mental model, bad faith requires that the author try to convince you of something that they know is untrue (or at least may likely be untrue). Is my model wrong? If so, how?