correcting gramatical errors

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
Another equally lame one is invoking Godwin's Law.

Do you really mean invoking it, or rather perpetrating an argument to which Godwin's Law is applicable?

-Garth

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Originally posted by: Garth

Originally posted by: CaptainGoodnight
Another equally lame one is invoking Godwin's Law.

Do you really mean invoking it, or rather perpetrating an argument to which Godwin's Law is applicable?

-Garth

Both.

Edit: I was thinking more along the lines of invoking it given the context of the thread. I see it as a cop out, and I think it comparable to nitpicking someone's grammar. For cases where it legitimately applies, I still think it?s a rather lame debate tactic.

 

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
A recent example.

Just proves you have no counter arguement IMO.

Who says the two are mutually exclusive? What about the option of correcting someone's grammar whilst at the same time refuting his/her argument? You're right, though, ATOT participants are fonder of mocking someone's grammar than directly addressing the issue.

 

[igowerf]

Attacking someone's grammar is a logical fallacy. It just shows that you're a weak debater.

http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/attack.htm

 

[DainBramaged]

Originally posted by: FoBoT
you don't know all the tactics of the flamer's bible?

I wish I had a copy of the Trolling Bible.

 

[Ozoned]

Related topic