41 ms·

This is circular. Circular, subjective, I'm not sure what the argument here is. There's no disagreement these rules don't meet the standards of formal logic.

by pvg 4y ago

This is circular. Circular, subjective, I'm not sure what the argument here is. There's no disagreement these rules don't meet the standards of formal logic. Anyone looking for something to nitpick and fight about will succeed. [...] I'm not really even convinced discussing defamation on a post about defamation should be considered a tangent Isn't that a tautology? Wait, we're not doing that. It might not be a tangent, the tone and phrasing count too. For instance, people often write the good version of their comment after they get mod-berated, in defense of their originally iffy comment. Again, it's the effects that count. The poster could have easily written a less hackle-raising, summoning-reply-guys-to-the-reply-guy comment and we wouldn't need to define tangents from first principles to begin with.

maxbond 4y ago
If we're just throwing accusations of logical fallacies back and forth now, than I'd point out we've reached the point in the conversation where we're having a literal tone argument. I don't find this to be a pedantic tone (my read is that they're adding detail rather than making a pedantic correction), if you do I don't see how I can convince you or be convinced by you, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree. (To clarify, I don't mean to suggest these rules should be held to the standard of formal logic; maybe a better way to explain my criticism would be to say, if you leave a noisy complaint in response to a comment, you are responsible for your actions, not the commenter you're responding to. I can choose to leave a noisy comment in response to any post, no matter how careful someone is with their tone or how well they follow the guidelines; if I did so, it would be no one's responsibility but my own. I can't use my reaction to justify my reaction. Similarly, we can't criticize this comment as resulting in us defining a tangent; you and I made that choice.)

by pvg 4y ago

maxbond 4y ago

If we're just throwing accusations of logical fallacies back and forth now, than I'd point out we've reached the point in the conversation where we're having a literal tone argument. I don't find this to be a pedantic tone (my read is that they're adding detail rather than making a pedantic correction), if you do I don't see how I can convince you or be convinced by you, so I think we'll have to agree to disagree. (To clarify, I don't mean to suggest these rules should be held to the standard of formal logic; maybe a better way to explain my criticism would be to say, if you leave a noisy complaint in response to a comment, you are responsible for your actions, not the commenter you're responding to. I can choose to leave a noisy comment in response to any post, no matter how careful someone is with their tone or how well they follow the guidelines; if I did so, it would be no one's responsibility but my own. I can't use my reaction to justify my reaction. Similarly, we can't criticize this comment as resulting in us defining a tangent; you and I made that choice.)