On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 07:28:09PM +1000, Ben Finney wrote: > "Bernhard R. Link" <brlink@debian.org> writes: > > > Perhaps there is a way to […] discourage all meta-discussion or > > mentioning of "fallacy", "ad-hominem" or "strawman" on the other > > lists. > > Perhaps you have a better way of succinct terms to use when challenging > those logical fallacies? Surely you're not saying you want such > fallacies to go unchallenged in the forums where they appear? > Please find below a form which I hope you find useful: Dear _NAME_, It appears to me that you have a "logical fallacy", in your message _MSGID_. This first occurs on line _LINENUM_. [ ] argumentum ad antiquitatem [ ] argumentum ad hominem [ ] argumentum ad ignorantiam [ ] argumentum ad logicam [ ] argumentum ad misericordiam [ ] argumentum ad nauseam [ ] argumentum ad numerum [ ] argumentum ad populum [ ] argumentum ad verecundiam [ ] circulus in demonstrando [ ] complex question [ ] dicto simpliciter [ ] naturalistic fallacy [ ] nature, appeal to [ ] non sequitur [X] petitio principii [ ] post hoc ergo propter hoc [ ] red herring [ ] slippery slope [ ] straw man [ ] tu quoque Replies to have been set to debian-devel-prime. This is the same list as debian-devel, but adds a "X-Prime: 1" counter which increments with each suffix of -prime. Thus meta-meta-meta discussions are sent to debian-devel-prime-prime-prime@lists.debian.org. This may not render your entire argument invalid, please re-submit your message for consideration once the above has been corrected, and everyone has had time for a glass of milk and a cookie. Hugs, and kisses, _MYNAME_ -- <@nurn> Paedophile Glitter arrives in UK <@nurn> is it me or does that sound like a very inappropriate brand name? <@sooB> the sort that would only be advertised in the run-up to christmas <@nurn> it's like a twisted my little pony name
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature