4 ms·

>> This is an ad hominem which assumes intent unknown to anyone other than the person to whom you replied. > What am I missing here? Intent. Neither you nor

>> This is an ad hominem which assumes intent unknown to anyone other than the person to whom you replied. > What am I missing here? Intent. Neither you nor I know what the person to whom you replied had. > Those weren't curt summaries, they were quotes! And not pull quotes, they were the unedited beginning of each claim! Maybe the more important part of that sentence was: Subsequently railing against comment rankings ... But you do you. I commented as I did in hope it helped address what I interpreted as confusion regarding how the posts were being received. If it did not help, I apologize.

anoncareer0212 2y ago
>>> This is an ad hominem which assumes intent unknown to anyone other than the person to whom you replied. >> [elided] What am I missing here? > Intent. Neither you nor I know what the person to whom you replied had. Here's the part you elided: "I looked up the definition [of lying]. It says "used with reference to a situation involving deception or founded on a mistaken impression." That makes it quite clear whether or not I'm missing "intent". This also makes it quite clear that I am not making an ad hominem. I am using a simple, everyday, word used to describe the act of advancing false claims, whether through deception or mistaken impression.