2 ms·

I agree with pretty much everything you say here. In your original comment you said, The author seems to have the attitude of "I don't understand why peopl

I agree with pretty much everything you say here. In your original comment you said, The author seems to have the attitude of "I don't understand why people do X, therefore people who do X are morons." Which doesn't add anything to the discussion of this article. It's simply an ad-hominem and nothing else. Where as the author provided reasons why he thought the people behind modern NoSQL systems are morons. So even though he used an insult he made it clear why he was using it (even if his argument was weak). Now that you've explained your position it makes a lot more sense. However I never did say whether I agree with the author or not. I'm still curious as to whether the author might have a point despite how poorly constructed his argument is. You made some really interesting points that I'm probably going to follow up on. What were these 'mistakes' that the author keeps referring to? What was the motivation for the invention of the RDBMS? How similar are NoSQL systems today to the systems which the RDBMS was supposedly invented to replace?

weavejester 15y ago
It is not an ad hominem attack to suggest that someone doesn't understand the subject matter. An ad hominem argument is an attempt to win an argument by making claims about the person's character that are irrelevant to the argument. Saying, "I don't think this person understands what he is talking about," is not an ad hominem attack, because it is relevant to the argument. It might be unjustified, but that's another matter entirely. Apparently, since I just looked this up, calling someone a moron isn't an ad hominem attack either, but merely verbal abuse, so I retract my earlier statement where I accused the author of an ad hominem attack. As to whether the author has a point, he might do, but unless he puts forward a good argument we can only wonder.

weavejester 15y ago

It is not an ad hominem attack to suggest that someone doesn't understand the subject matter. An ad hominem argument is an attempt to win an argument by making claims about the person's character that are irrelevant to the argument. Saying, "I don't think this person understands what he is talking about," is not an ad hominem attack, because it is relevant to the argument. It might be unjustified, but that's another matter entirely. Apparently, since I just looked this up, calling someone a moron isn't an ad hominem attack either, but merely verbal abuse, so I retract my earlier statement where I accused the author of an ad hominem attack. As to whether the author has a point, he might do, but unless he puts forward a good argument we can only wonder.