3 ms·
>"posts" would connote more than one, correct? Yes, the same applies for you calling everyone who doesn't share your view a "shill". So according to my posts,
by nivla 13y ago
>"posts" would connote more than one, correct?
Yes, the same applies for you calling everyone who doesn't share your view a "shill". So according to my posts, I am pro MS, pro Firefox, anti Chrome, pro Google etc. I sure hope I dint invalidate the "pro MS" with the cons this time. Has it every occurred to you that maybe people talk positively or negatively about product X or Y, not because they are a shill, but because they can relate to it or have some experience with it? I humbly request you to change your mindset from the pre-2000 slashdot era, grow up and stop calling everyone who doesn't share the same views as you a "shill".
- aclevernickname 13y ago> Yes, the same applies for you calling everyone who doesn't share your view a "shill". Check out your Argumentum Ad Hominem! [1] > "shill" > shill > "shill" are you quoting me when you say "shill"? where did I use that word? If I didn't use it, doesn't that make this a Strawman Fallacy? [2] >I humbly request you to change your mindset from the pre-2000 slashdot era Perfect example of Association Fallacy [3]. > grow up followed by an Appeal to emotion! nice! [4] - [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_by_association https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guilt_by_association [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_emotion