There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 29, 2009 21:59 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: There's one final comment I want to make here. by njs
Parent article: OSCON keynote: Standing out in the crowd

I believe there was a comment earlier regarding the creatures crawling out
from underneath their rocks.

Oh, look, the same damn names are back again, derailing like crazy and
claiming they're not sexist while routinely saying things that would get
them punched or ostracised or both if they said it to someone's face.

to post comments

There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 29, 2009 22:13 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (3 responses)

Oh, look. Ad hominem.

I'm bowing out now, before Jon has to ask us to quit.

There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 29, 2009 22:42 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] (2 responses)

No, it would only be an ad hominem attack if I was claiming that you were
wrong *because of who you are*.

I'm saying 'look, there are people here making the same wrong arguments.
Oh, look, they made them before.'

That isn't the same thing. The arguments would be wrong even if completely
different people were making them, but it's curious that the same small
group are still at it and appear to have learnt very little.

There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 30, 2009 1:58 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (1 responses)

No, you're making an ad hominem reply because you are "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."

Not that you're claiming I'm wrong *because* I crawled up out of <mumble>, just that you're diverting the argument from whether I'm right to my parentage.

There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 31, 2009 1:25 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link]

He also said you were "derailing like crazy and claiming they're not sexist while routinely saying things that would get them punched or ostracised or both if they said it to someone's face." You may disagree, but you can't claim that he's not talking about your words.

But anyway, you've started this whole tangent about whether or not he's derailing, when *he wasn't even replying to your post*. I attacked your argument, he commented on my attack. You ignored my attack to go off on some irrelevant side-discussion, trying to make yourself out as a victim of a fallacy you don't even understand. Who's derailing here?