3 ms·
You're awfully close to a No true Scotsman argument, there. However, if you're interested in damaging photos that aren't secret, you need but take a look at the
by sesqu 13y ago
You're awfully close to a No true Scotsman argument, there. However, if you're interested in damaging photos that aren't secret, you need but take a look at the history of social news. There have been a number of high-profile false allegations with associated vigilantism.
- corresation 13y agoI'm nowhere near that fallacy. I am specifically looking for examples to the claim that I questioned (the single example provided to me thus far actually supports exactly what I said). That the crowd can be stupid (as in the recent Reddit Boston bombing nonsense) has absolutely no relevance to this.
- sesqu 13y agoSo what you're looking for is 1) a photo 2) not depicting a secret 3) publicized unintentionally 4) that ruined a life or relationship 5) without involving mass misunderstanding Sorry, I can't provide one for you. The documentation on such events is typically kept to a small circulation.
- pessimizer 13y ago>You're awfully close to a No true Scotsman argument, there. Not really. More an argument that all Scotsmen are men.