Can we refocus on the issues at hand?

[Simos Xenitellis]

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Benjamin Kerensa <bkerensa at ubuntu.com>
wrote:

> Sorry, I trust the definition Wikipedia, Webster and the Oxford definition
> provide versus some random site but that
> site essentially says the same as wikipedia just with different
> storytelling.
>
>
Ouch.

I ask you what specifically was ad hominem (I mention the "ragequit"), but
you still have not said.

The Wikipedia description is fine, but you need to read the whole article
about the types of ad hominem attacks.
Which one of the types of ad hominem attack do you think has taken place
here?
Abusive? Tu quoque? Circumstancial? Guilt by association?

There are national elections around here and I am sensitive to picking up
fallacies.

Simos


>
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Simos Xenitellis <
> simos.lists at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Benjamin Kerensa <bkerensa at ubuntu.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 16, 2015 10:06 AM, "Simos Xenitellis" <simos.lists at googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 5:15 PM, Benjamin Kerensa <bkerensa at ubuntu.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> The ad hominem attack is strong in you today.
>>> >
>>> > An "ad hominem" attack is when you debate someone and call them "fat",
>>> "bald" or anything disparaging but irrelevant to the discussion.
>>> > If you call "ad hominem", then in your reply you need to highlight the
>>> exact issue.
>>> >
>>>
>>> From Wikipedia:
>>> An *ad hominem* (Latin <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin> for "to
>>> the man" or "to the person"[1]
>>> <https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#cite_note-1>), short for *argumentum
>>> ad hominem*, means responding to arguments by attacking a person's
>>> character, rather than addressing the content of their arguments.
>>>
>>> This is exactly what Jorge did because instead of addressing the matter
>>> at hand he made attacks against my character not addressing the content of
>>> the argument.
>>>
>>> Mind you if you look to the list everyone was upset so no of course he
>>> not discuss that content but launched into ad hominem.
>>>
>>> I even politely sent him a private email and his response there was very
>>> rude too.
>>>
>> "Ad hominem" is a bit more nuanced than that. See
>> https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem and the listed example.
>> The reference to you is about the frequent ragequits. Do you consider
>> that as ad hominen? It is not.
>> An ad hominem would be if he said you are the guy that puts ice cubes in
>> the beer.
>>
>> Simos
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Benjamin Kerensa*
> *http://benjaminkerensa.com <http://benjaminkerensa.com>*
> *"I am what I am because of who we all are" - Ubuntu*
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-community-team/attachments/20150916/09ec83c0/attachment.html>