5 ms·

> rhetorically enviable position On the other hand, using yourself as a personal example (based on your own self-evaluation of yourself, which we have no way t

> rhetorically enviable position On the other hand, using yourself as a personal example (based on your own self-evaluation of yourself, which we have no way to assess the accuracy of for ourselves) is a rhetorical error. Your personal attributes are irrelevant to the truth, and anyone who doesn't want to believe your conclusion can easily call them into question and distract from the real issue.

randallsquared 17y ago
Well, it mostly just helps when someone says, "Well, if you'd ever created anything, you'd understand!" or "Well, if you were a writer|artist|filmmaker|programmer, you'd understand!" That is, I only seriously bring it out when someone explains with a pat on the head that when I grow up and start actually creating stuff, my views on copyright and patents will suddenly change and I'll be in favor of them.
- xenophanes 17y ago
  I don't think it's worth one's time to prepare strategies for how to deal with invalid arguments that would only be raised by people who aren't going to listen in any case (they either not seriously trying, or very stupid, or very ignorant of what constitutes a good or bad argument).
  - randallsquared 17y ago
    Oh, I didn't prepare it ahead of time; that's the most basic argument many people have, and I've heard it over and over since I first came to this viewpoint ~20 years ago.
- graemep 17y ago
  Well, it has not changed my views (admittedly I am not entirely anti-copyright, only against current laws). Anyway, why should someone's view be more valid because they have a vested interest? I do find plagiarism and copying that is not properly attributed, or that is not necessary very annoying. Why do people copy and paste text from my website to Wikipedia, Scribd and other places? Why not just link? Why not attribute properly. Most sites are pretty good at dealing with this - A Wikipedia editor spotted it a copy and paste and took down the content before I got round to complaining, but Scribd seems to go out of its way to make it as difficult as possible (written DMCA notices only).
derefr 17y ago
It seems his post was rhetorically enviable in the meta, as well.

randallsquared 17y ago

Well, it mostly just helps when someone says, "Well, if you'd ever created anything, you'd understand!" or "Well, if you were a writer|artist|filmmaker|programmer, you'd understand!" That is, I only seriously bring it out when someone explains with a pat on the head that when I grow up and start actually creating stuff, my views on copyright and patents will suddenly change and I'll be in favor of them.

xenophanes 17y ago
I don't think it's worth one's time to prepare strategies for how to deal with invalid arguments that would only be raised by people who aren't going to listen in any case (they either not seriously trying, or very stupid, or very ignorant of what constitutes a good or bad argument).
- randallsquared 17y ago
  Oh, I didn't prepare it ahead of time; that's the most basic argument many people have, and I've heard it over and over since I first came to this viewpoint ~20 years ago.
graemep 17y ago
Well, it has not changed my views (admittedly I am not entirely anti-copyright, only against current laws). Anyway, why should someone's view be more valid because they have a vested interest? I do find plagiarism and copying that is not properly attributed, or that is not necessary very annoying. Why do people copy and paste text from my website to Wikipedia, Scribd and other places? Why not just link? Why not attribute properly. Most sites are pretty good at dealing with this - A Wikipedia editor spotted it a copy and paste and took down the content before I got round to complaining, but Scribd seems to go out of its way to make it as difficult as possible (written DMCA notices only).

derefr 17y ago

It seems his post was rhetorically enviable in the meta, as well.