Go back
Forum Moderation

Forum Moderation

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
"of course to you that means everything has to be at a 13 year old's level"
Oh boy. 😞

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
"of course to you that means everything has to be at a 13 year old's level"
That's a "personal attack"???🙄

Obviously you don't want to address the points raised.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
That's a "personal attack"???🙄

Obviously you don't want to address the points raised.
Look up the definition of ad hominem. It clearly falls under that.

Also, questioning my motivations "you don't want to address the points raised" is another ad hominem.

Personally, I think your points are valid, but I'd rather not banter with you.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by darvlay
Please, no1, this forum hardly fits that description.

What is it you say? You're being shrill and emotional, Mary?
Perhaps not, but that is the standard the three Mods here are espousing. That they aren't as diligent in enforcing that policy (well, not against everybody) as they profess shouldn't stop me from debating their professed position.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
Look up the definition of ad hominem. It clearly falls under that.

Also, questioning my motivations "you don't want to address the points raised" is another ad hominem.

Personally, I think your points are valid, but I'd rather not banter with you.
Then don't.

BTW, that's not an "ad hominem"; it's a characterization of his position, not of HIM.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
Nope, I'm talking about your last post to me. if you weren't trying to be difficult, you wouldn't have conveniently forgotten that pornography was (and still is) being mentioned in this thread.

You're welcome.
Yes, and who threw it in to the mix?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kirksey957
Yes, and who threw it in to the mix?
I couldn't care less.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by no1marauder
Then don't.

BTW, that's not an "ad hominem"; it's a characterization of his position, not of HIM.
Wikipedia says:

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man) consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim."

You made an attack on his (or my) belief.

It is hard not to respond to you when you are so absolutley wrong.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
I couldn't care less.
Take your toys and go home. Be gone.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kirksey957
Take your toys and go home. Be gone.
I didn't even talk to you or mention you, but you still felt the need to defend yourself and be difficult.

You aren't important enough for me to talk about, I don't know why you thought you were.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kirksey957
Take your toys and go home. Be gone.
Seems like that's your only response to the majority that disagree with you 😛

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
I didn't even talk to you or mention you, but you still felt the need to defend yourself and be difficult.

You aren't important enough for me to talk about, I don't know why you thought you were.
Because forum moderators tell me so.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by kirksey957
Because forum moderators tell me so.
I'm sorry, I shouldn't have been so mean. I just made a comment and you assumed that it was about you, but it wasn't. You are very important, don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Draxus
Wikipedia says:

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man) consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing e n his (or my) belief.

It is hard not to respond to you when you are so absolutley wrong.
Jesus H Christmas.

"than by addressing the substance of the argument"

I was addressing the substance of his argument which is that all posts on this site have to be acceptable to a 13 year old mentality. This is a curious position on a site which states in its TOS that you should be over 18 to use the site.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.