Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9173646" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Fundamentally, the issue is that everyone has access to the shorthands, wants to use them, and generally don't use them only when valid*. Shorthands, are, for want of a better word, templates. We apply them with the assumption that they will be applicable in a given situation because they are in broad terms, and that's not always the case. Especially in these long, winding forum discussions where someone might be making an argument with some underlying assumptions (particularly with regards to scope or the like) based on what was said between them and a third participant two pages back. If I'm a member of that voluntary audience of the argument, I generally want to see you** show your work so I can judge for myself whether I think it is applicable in this instance. To keep out of the Stormwind discussion for a while, I'll use Oberoni as an example. I can't think of an instance where someone calling out an Oberoni fallacy wouldn't be better served (in their interest in convincing said voluntary audience) with something along the lines of, "I don't think rule 0 is really helpful here/solves the problem, ...[and then a spelled-out argument]." *I mean, both strawman and ad homonym arguments are prevalent; yet when I see someone on the internet whip them out, my knee jerk reaction is that they are doing so in replacement of a convincing counter argument. **the proverbial you. Whomever is trying to make a case.</blockquote>

Verification