• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Announcement Insults and Personal Attacks No Longer Allowed!

Page 26 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
32,814
2,753
126
The confusing part is that an ad hominem fallacy that isn't a personal attack still falls under DH1. The example that I gave @jpishgar was DH1 and he said it was allowed. But the original post still says that DH1 is prohibited.--I seriously doubt that jpishger said that t use an ad hominem fallacy was OK...
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
43,956
3,227
136
Interesting take, but I'm afraid you've misread and misunderstood several things. First, you have ignored the fact that there are two new rules, not one. In fact, what you've done is conflate the two, because you don't understand that an ad hominem isn't always a personal attack. The ad hominem rule may be problematic to enforce, actually. And then there are the personal attacks which are not ad hominems because a poster has based his entire argument on his personal credibility which now can never be challenged meaning we in effect have to accept any argument entirely premised on poster's alleged personal observations and experiences which BTW happens semi-frequently around here.

Then there is the issue of mod intervention when someone repeatedly misstates a FACT in spite of repeated refutation. I notice the word FACT appears nowhere in what you wrote above but the word "opinion" appears several times because you refuse to recognize any distinction between fact and opinion no matter how many times it's explained to you. That the sun rises in the east and sets in the west rather than the other way around because the earth spins in a certain direction isn't a matter of opinion. It isn't a grey area either. Neither is the fact that water is wet, that the VP's name is Mike Pence, or that China employs more people in manufacturing than does the US.

Conflating fact with opinion is not only logically incorrect. It's exactly what has gone wrong in this country. So few people respect facts anymore just as so few people respect science any more. I don't want to live in your world where everything is just a matter of opinion because God help us when facts don't matter anymore and everything is this wishy-washy, mealy mouthed grey area that you keep going on about, because then, anything goes. Genocide, forced sterilization, you name it. Think I'm exaggerating? The Nazis made up all kinds of false factual allegations about Jews, people believed whatever they were told, and look what happened. But in your world, all those allegations were just opinions of the Nazis, not lies. ANd therefore, they were irrefutable because only factual assertions can ever be truly refuted.

So far as the mod rule on this, it is not meant to punish opinions. We know this because Perknose said so. You're mischaracterizing what he said. And that's a FACT.

It's obviously meant for extreme situations so frankly I wouldn't worry about it unless or until it looks like the mods are going over-board with it. Frankly, I doubt we'll see it enforced more than once or twice a year.
Thank you, woolfe, for eloquently and comprehensively stating the moderator stance on all this in full, all the while addressing a poster who has steadfastly refused to understand this stance no further room NOT to understand, if he is indeed posting honestly and in good faith. My Mod Hat is off to you, good sir.

Perknose
Forum Director
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,025
571
126
Thank you, woolfe, for eloquently and comprehensively stating the moderator stance on all this in full, all the while addressing a poster who has steadfastly refused to understand this stance no further room NOT to understand, if he is indeed posting honestly and in good faith. My Mod Hat is off to you, good sir.

Perknose
Forum Director
What does posting in good faith mean?
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
27,189
6,731
136
What does posting in good faith mean?
It means listening to others and discussing the actual points being made and not the arguments you wish they made.

For example; complaining about the possibility of people receiving an infraction for their opinion when it's been explicitly stated that that won't happen, is not an example of posting in good faith.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,025
571
126
It means listening to others and discussing the actual points being made and not the arguments you wish they made.

For example; complaining about the possibility of people receiving an infraction for their opinion when it's been explicitly stated that that won't happen, is not an example of posting in good faith.
What confuses me is that "in good faith" usually means "honestly and sincerely."

Is the allegation that the person in your example didnt really believe his own argument?
 

CHADBOGA

Platinum Member
Mar 31, 2009
2,013
599
136
I dont understand. A person is accused of arguing in bad faith. That seems to me to mean not arguing honestly or sincerely. Is that not correct?
If you disagree with a fanatic, you are arguing in bad faith.
 

Iron Woode

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 10, 1999
26,552
4,145
126
I dont understand. A person is accused of arguing in bad faith. That seems to me to mean not arguing honestly or sincerely. Is that not correct?
posting in good faith means posting honestly, sincerely and without insulting others due to their points of view. I would add integrity as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JEDIYoda

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
25,706
5,291
136
posting in good faith means posting honestly, sincerely and without insulting others due to their points of view. I would add integrity as well.
I'd also add "posting with an open mind" because if your mind is made up and you are not open to changing it then you are not discussing an issue, you are proselytizing. You aren't looking for the truth, you are looking for excuses to believe what you want to believe in spite of the truth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
25,706
5,291
136
If you disagree with a fanatic, you are arguing in bad faith.
This is an example of posting in bad faith. It characterizes all liberals as fanatics and adds a straw man: anyone who disagrees with a liberal will be judged as posting in bad faith. It's a nice tidy little bubble where a conservative can say anything, no matter how retarded, and if someone calls them out on their moronic statement, the conservative can just hand-wave away all criticism, no matter how valid, as the ravings of a fanatic who just doesn't want to hear an opposing viewpoint.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

crashtech

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2013
9,512
1,413
126
So much unintentional irony. Today's online environment promotes bubble-dwelling by all participants. I participate mainly in two online forums, one has become almost totally conservative, and then there is Anandtech (P&N), which is almost totally liberal. The former wasn't always that way, and I have to wonder about P&N, since I'm relatively new here. But something is going on, because back in the early days righties and lefties shared the same space in fairly proportionate numbers. Expectations of our online experience have shifted due to many forces that aren't necessarily malevolent, but are producing an undesirable outcome.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
27,189
6,731
136
So much unintentional irony. Today's online environment promotes bubble-dwelling by all participants. I participate mainly in two online forums, one has become almost totally conservative, and then there is Anandtech (P&N), which is almost totally liberal. The former wasn't always that way, and I have to wonder about P&N, since I'm relatively new here. But something is going on, because back in the early days righties and lefties shared the same space in fairly proportionate numbers. Expectations of our online experience have shifted due to many forces that aren't necessarily malevolent, but are producing an undesirable outcome.
People retreated to safe spaces. Places where their views wouldn’t be challenged.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

crashtech

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2013
9,512
1,413
126
People retreated to safe spaces. Places where their views wouldn’t be challenged.
Essentially this has been the outcome, but I think there are factors that have influenced what you call retreat which could be called the cultivation of expectations by companies that wish to maximize engagement. We're being conditioned to being surrounded by points of view (and products, and people, etc.) which jive with how we think and who we are. This tends to make dissenting views all the more jarring and antagonistic when they are experienced close up inside the bubble (coming from another forum member, for example) instead of from outside the group. expressed by the "other."
 
  • Like
Reactions: ivwshane

DarthKyrie

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2016
1,328
950
146
So much unintentional irony. Today's online environment promotes bubble-dwelling by all participants. I participate mainly in two online forums, one has become almost totally conservative, and then there is Anandtech (P&N), which is almost totally liberal. The former wasn't always that way, and I have to wonder about P&N, since I'm relatively new here. But something is going on, because back in the early days righties and lefties shared the same space in fairly proportionate numbers. Expectations of our online experience have shifted due to many forces that aren't necessarily malevolent, but are producing an undesirable outcome.
The Reich has mainly retreated to their corner because they don't deal in facts anymore only feels and opinion. The sole purpose of Fox "News" was to try to prevent what happened to Nixon from happening to another member of the Reich, regardless of the guilt or crimes of that member.

The shit started getting worse with the election of a black man as President of this country. All of a sudden the Reich started caring about things that they hadn't cared about prior to his election. The National Debt suddenly mattered to them when it didn't matter one iota under both Bushes and under Reagan, the worst part was that to them the black man was responsible for all of the debt that those 3 racked up. The Budget Deficit suddenly mattered to them after 8 years of George W. Bush and his close to $1 Trillion a year in debt (while also fighting 2 wars that weren't being paid for), and most of that debt was authorized by Republicans in Congress during the Bush years.

As far as your point of it being malevolent, it is very much so because the Reich is doing this knowing that they are lying to the voters. The outcome is something they don't care about as long as the wealth of the country continues to flow into the hands of the very wealthy and in particular the Reich's donor wing.
 

crashtech

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2013
9,512
1,413
126
@DarthKyrie , I can't help but think you may have missed the point of my post entirely, while also perhaps illustrating what happens to our views when we become isolated around those who have uniform viewpoints.

It should be obvious to anyone who might otherwise challenge your views and change your mind that it would be a pretty tough thing to do, when you've gotten to the point when the other side is just the faceless enemy: "The Reich."

A sad and apocalyptic way to view fellow citizens, imo, but very common.
 

DarthKyrie

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2016
1,328
950
146
@DarthKyrie , I can't help but think you may have missed the point of my post entirely, while also perhaps illustrating what happens to our views when we become isolated around those who have uniform viewpoints.

It should be obvious to anyone who might otherwise challenge your views and change your mind that it would be a pretty tough thing to do, when you've gotten to the point when the other side is just the faceless enemy: "The Reich."

A sad and apocalyptic way to view fellow citizens, imo, but very common.
There is the Reich and the Demonrats, these are the 2 main political parties in this country and I belong to neither party. If you cared to notice when I was mentioning our fellow plebs I referred to them as the Reich's voters, not as the Reich itself. There is a difference between those that are willfully lying to and misleading the people (the Reich) and the people being lied to (the plebs aka voters). My fellow plebs are not my enemy, that would be the insanely rich who finance the Reich and Demonrats.

Besides, I hate all people equally it doesn't matter what their politics are. Humans are a parasite and should be exterminated from the face of this planet.
 

crashtech

Diamond Member
Jan 4, 2013
9,512
1,413
126
There is the Reich and the Demonrats, these are the 2 main political parties in this country and I belong to neither party. If you cared to notice when I was mentioning our fellow plebs I referred to them as the Reich's voters, not as the Reich itself. There is a difference between those that are willfully lying to and misleading the people (the Reich) and the people being lied to (the plebs aka voters). My fellow plebs are not my enemy, that would be the insanely rich who finance the Reich and Demonrats.

Besides, I hate all people equally it doesn't matter what their politics are. Humans are a parasite and should be exterminated from the face of this planet.
Well it seems as if I got the sad and apocalyptic part right, at least. Maybe a planet-busting asteroid with your name on it is headed our way, who knows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

DarthKyrie

Golden Member
Jul 11, 2016
1,328
950
146
Well it seems as if I got the sad and apocalyptic part right, at least. Maybe a planet-busting asteroid with your name on it is headed our way, who knows.
With my luck, I would end up surviving the impact even it fell directly on me.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
32,814
2,753
126
It is the rights fault that things are the way they are!
I personally do not believe the left is in any way complicit!
In fact It probably started sooner than the OBama presidency but those same people who went all ballistic when a man of color was elected POTUS are those same people who are refusing to see the truth concerning our current resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: CHADBOGA
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY