5 ms·

Ad hominem attack.

by daenz 4y ago

Ad hominem attack.

moron4hire 4y ago
No, it's evidence that he over reacts to minor issues, marking his criticisms in general as not particularly trustworthy.
- daenz 4y ago
  I don't know either of you, so I don't have a dog in a fight. But when you start a post off with " so and so is a phenomenal asshole", You should know that a reasonable person reads that as an ad hominem attack, regardless of how you intended it.
  - filoleg 4y ago
    > But when you start a post off with "so and so is a phenomenal asshole", You should know that a reasonable person reads that as an ad hominem attack I would expect a reasonable person to read through the entire comment and not just the first sentence, before assessing the validity of the point the author was making.
    - daenz 4y ago
      The rest of the comment supports the first sentence.
      - moron4hire 4y ago
        Yes. Without a supporting statement, it's ad hominem. But I provided a supporting statement. This is the issue I'm taking about: https://mobile.twitter.com/richgel999/status/1464435786808504332 https://mobile.twitter.com/richgel999/status/146443578680850... Which links to here: https://github.com/phoboslab/qoi/issues/35 https://github.com/phoboslab/qoi/issues/35 It got so bad even John Carmack told him he was out of line: https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1464639553046728709?s=20&t=cLeah7KdXrz0TGaU4iOsNA https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1464639553046728709... Where everyone agrees, yes, the image should be removed. They didn't know about its history. Would he please stop being a gigantic asshole about it. So if that's not blowing things out of proportion, I don't know what is.
      - filoleg 4y ago
        Yes, but there is a difference between "he is an asshole, which means that he blows everything out of proportion, and I don't believe him with this story" and "there are plenty of situations that actually happened where he seems to always blow the situation out of proportion and exaggerate to unjustifiably paint people in terrible light, and therefore I believe he is an asshole". The former would be an ad hominem reasoning, but the latter one wouldn't be. And the parent comment you replied to was the latter.
        daenz 4y ago
        >...therefore I believe he is an asshole Is an attack directed against the person rather than their position, and is therefore ad hominem
        moron4hire 4y ago
        The mistake you're making is missing that the whole issue is one of character. He has not presented any irrefutable or falsifiable facts (indeed, he speaks in thinly veiled code, so we can't be completely sure who he's talking about, even though it's really a pretty good bet). He's speaking on the character of the people he worked with. His own character is therefore completely on the table for criticism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Valid_types_of_ad_hominem_arguments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Valid_types_of_ad_h... > Ad hominem arguments are relevant where the person being criticised is advancing arguments from authority, or testimony based on personal experience, rather than proposing a formal syllogism.
        daenz 4y ago
        That's fair, you convinced me.
rendall 4y ago
What do you mean by ad hominem, here?

Ad hominem attack.

by daenz 4y ago

Ad hominem attack.

No, it's evidence that he over reacts to minor issues, marking his criticisms in general as not particularly trustworthy.

daenz 4y ago
I don't know either of you, so I don't have a dog in a fight. But when you start a post off with " so and so is a phenomenal asshole", You should know that a reasonable person reads that as an ad hominem attack, regardless of how you intended it.
- filoleg 4y ago
  > But when you start a post off with "so and so is a phenomenal asshole", You should know that a reasonable person reads that as an ad hominem attack I would expect a reasonable person to read through the entire comment and not just the first sentence, before assessing the validity of the point the author was making.
  - daenz 4y ago
    The rest of the comment supports the first sentence.
    - moron4hire 4y ago
      Yes. Without a supporting statement, it's ad hominem. But I provided a supporting statement. This is the issue I'm taking about: https://mobile.twitter.com/richgel999/status/1464435786808504332 https://mobile.twitter.com/richgel999/status/146443578680850... Which links to here: https://github.com/phoboslab/qoi/issues/35 https://github.com/phoboslab/qoi/issues/35 It got so bad even John Carmack told him he was out of line: https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1464639553046728709?s=20&t=cLeah7KdXrz0TGaU4iOsNA https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/1464639553046728709... Where everyone agrees, yes, the image should be removed. They didn't know about its history. Would he please stop being a gigantic asshole about it. So if that's not blowing things out of proportion, I don't know what is.
    - filoleg 4y ago
      Yes, but there is a difference between "he is an asshole, which means that he blows everything out of proportion, and I don't believe him with this story" and "there are plenty of situations that actually happened where he seems to always blow the situation out of proportion and exaggerate to unjustifiably paint people in terrible light, and therefore I believe he is an asshole". The former would be an ad hominem reasoning, but the latter one wouldn't be. And the parent comment you replied to was the latter.
      - daenz 4y ago
        >...therefore I believe he is an asshole Is an attack directed against the person rather than their position, and is therefore ad hominem
        moron4hire 4y ago
        The mistake you're making is missing that the whole issue is one of character. He has not presented any irrefutable or falsifiable facts (indeed, he speaks in thinly veiled code, so we can't be completely sure who he's talking about, even though it's really a pretty good bet). He's speaking on the character of the people he worked with. His own character is therefore completely on the table for criticism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Valid_types_of_ad_hominem_arguments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Valid_types_of_ad_h... > Ad hominem arguments are relevant where the person being criticised is advancing arguments from authority, or testimony based on personal experience, rather than proposing a formal syllogism.
        daenz 4y ago
        That's fair, you convinced me.

rendall 4y ago

What do you mean by ad hominem, here?