Mmm, a debate about debates. How meta. I have a couple of problems with this. First, by broadly sweeping "everything I don't like about arguments" under the la

Mmm, a debate about debates. How meta. I have a couple of problems with this. First, by broadly sweeping "everything I don't like about arguments" under the label "ad hominem", you're powerfully eroding the usefulness of the term. It has a specific use and purpose, and it's useful to understand the various fallacies in debate (http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/). Also, you admit that this style of debate has a place in entertainment writing -- in a thread about his letter to the editor. This was not a formal debate, nor was it the appropriate forum for such; he was writing a response that would reach a large number of readers, and they were his audience. Besides, aren't you committing the selfsame fallacy that you're accusing him of, according to your own rules? i.e., "Gladwell used methods I don't like, so he's wrong." I wasn't aware that this was a Reddit meme. I stopped visiting Reddit some months ago, and my usage fell off even before then. I'm glad it is, though. If someone's going to try and bolster their criticism of someone else by using fancy Latin phrases, they really ought to get called out on it by someone that knows better.