3 ms·

You seem to have a very narrow view of what is a relevant or a valid comment. Just because a counterargument doesn't completely refute the original comment, or

You seem to have a very narrow view of what is a relevant or a valid comment. Just because a counterargument doesn't completely refute the original comment, or "introduces" new concepts, doesn't make it irrelevant or "misdirection". Someone compared treatment of X 20 years ago to treatment of Y today -- seems pretty natural to bring up treatment of X more recently. You can't just say "the original comment didn't mention it so you can't mention it either". I don't see how your accusations of bad faith are warranted.

ricardo81 3y ago
If your doubts are true, why did you have to introduce an analogy? I feel I have a pretty open view. And, there's no definition of a 'valid' comment. I'll address points, raise points or whatever. Sorry, I'm not in the realm of 'valid' comments, never was.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > why did you have to introduce an analogy? GP made a comparison! How do you refute a comparison without criticising the comparison? > I'm not in the realm of 'valid' comments, never was Claiming misdirection is an argument about validity.