pawsplay said:How can you cite an article on Godwin's law and not realize you are invoking a (not universally accepted) corrolary to Godwin's law, not the law itself?
'Cause the article also talks about the corollary. And because however technically inaccurate it is to do so, folks use the name of the law to refer to the corollary in common usage. Godwin's law itself is a pointless observation without the corollary.