Hi, Ben Finney wrote: > "Bernhard R. Link" <brl...@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? >
I believe he meant only that these keywords tend to denote a crossing into the realm of meta-discussion, where the point in question ceases to be discussed, and instead the arguments themselves become points of contention. It doesn't mean the arguments are worthless, but indicates a certain departure from the main point, which could mean this branch of the discussion has started to dilute - so to speak - the thread and therefore could be taken somewhere else, in order to keep the central thread concise. Please note I'm not showing my endorsement for this idea, just clarifying what my interpretation of it was. Cheers -- Leo "costela" Antunes [insert a witty retort here] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org