Pure Ad Homenem (or however you spell it) threads

[Frighter]

i) No ad hominem arguments

This is not a playground. In order to produce high quality philosophical discussions we expect the posts to contain a good level of courtesy and respect. If something has angered you, walk away from the computer and come back when you have a clear head. It helps no-one to start throwing insults around the place. This rule is two-fold: Do not use personal attacks to further your argument (argumentum ad hominem) and don't use insults at

if this is truley a rule i suggest it be enforced. The three "bitch-fests" lets call them that i have seen at this site so far since ive been here have been let run way to far. I understand that you cant be here 24/7 ben to keep us all in line, but if you ask me, the jjj, WarriorMonk and the more recint BMW-Guy threads were let run way to far. The entire threads were dedicated to Ad Hominem but nothing was done about them until way to late if you ask me. These threads should be close IMMEDIATLEY when they are seen. Not allowed to be played out, and later decided to be closed. Now dont get me wrong, i complained awhile back about a thread being closed in the rant house, but i think the rant house is different. Its got a warning on it, but threads placed in the mundane babble should be closed before they are able to accumulate a couple pages of posts. I dont soley blame you, the other moderators are sureley to blame for their inaction. It seems you ben are the only one who actually ends up doing anything about it in the end.

But whatever, its your baord. You could ban us all and i couldnt argue against it.

[Rafajafar]

I obviously disagree.

JJJ- Banned
Warrior Monk - Banned
BMW-Guy - Only given space b/c he's a kid and relatively bright, plus he's willing to listen.

Either way, there were changes that needed to be made. These posts bring these changes to the attention of the poster.

I only hope that one day I will have a legitimate personal assault thread so that my life's work would be completed....

...my life must be really simple.

[ben]

Point taken Frighter. It's useful to let these threads run for a while to get a feel of how the general ILP community feels about a certain individual. In the case of jjj and Warrior Monk it was clear that everyone was just irritated by them. It eventually led to their banning. I use my discretion on these things and sometimes i'll judge it right and sometimes I won't but I like to think that ILP is fluid enough not to crumble if I make a few bad moderation judgements every now and then.

I also think that sometimes, those sort of threads add a bit of character to the board and we get to see some emotion and personality that we don't see in other threads. Perhaps it is for my own enjoyment that i leave them running? Maybe it's survival of the fittest being enacted right here and now? I don't really know, but your point is taken and thanks for raising it.

- ben

[Prolificisticationist]

Perhaps it is for my own enjoyment that i leave them running? Maybe it's survival of the fittest being enacted right here and now?

Maybe whole the Rules Announcement is just for show?



...Frighter has a legit point. As I stated in the Philosophy forum, ad hominem and argumentum ad hominem follies being allowed to run amok is generally not good for the health of a forum. IMO, gratuitous insults and similar behavior should be confined to our dedicated flamer's forum (Rant House). Else the Rules Announcement is meaningless (or worse, only selectively enforced).

-John

[Fulcrum]

What about Whitelotus?

[Prolificisticationist]

That's funny you should say that Fulcrum, since it was this Epistemology thread that prompted me to take a vocal stand. Here, Whitelotus attacks both the intelligence and worthiness of what various members have to offer. I'm all for a friendly, respectful debate, but Whitelotus' behavior struck me as particularly ugly for the simple fact that he is using his obvious high intelligence and wit in such a denigrating manner.

Yield: Just one long-ass bickerfest that is more unpleasant to read than enlightening. These guys are SMART, and having to watch these dudes taking such a negative approach to their debate is what hurts the forum overall (in my personal opinion). Anyway, the ILP rule against ad hominem shenanigans is designed specifically to dissuade people from going this route.

Even people who should know much better.

[Fulcrum]

I hope I have reason to be frank since Im in this discussion. In all the discussions I have read of him, he has done nothing expect perpetuate a dogma of his, an idea which he alludes through his imagination to all processes and things in the assumption that it works. This assumption works itself to a conclusion that it works. Then he defends this "deduction: of his like his life.

I have come across these kinds of people in some of the local villages here - they are so attuned to one logic and they probably spend time about this so much that there really is no way you can get around their twisted logic. They will only be convinced when something doesnt work as they think. Call it haggard wisdom if you will. But I do not choose to call it intelligence. Intelligence is not wasting time on a forum contributing nothing to a discussion when no one really likes you for your views or when there is no one who is going to see your point. Intelligence is not fracturing an arm and communing in some "World-society-for-vague-folks-who-sport-fractured-arms" to discuss the details of how you fractured your arm and that it has (without reasons) resulted in your dog doing unpleasant things with your carpet, which is irrelevance. It is not alluding fractured arms to the microscopic mechanics of particles in a von Karman vortex street. If he was intelligent like some of the people I know here, he would keep out of something if he was too good for it.

One will never get a thorough analysis of a problem with any of these people. They will give reasons which they have assumed, and sincerely believe that they have deduced them.

May I request the moderators to step in and sort these things out if, granted, we arent good for handling this stuff? I hope that is a fair thing to ask.

Please correct me if you think I am wrong or impertinent. This post was hastily framed, right after work...

[Prolificisticationist]

Oh, you wouldn't want that.

That would be overstepping their bounds - moderators are really just the janitors of a forum: They keep threads on-topic and keep a spirited flame-war from getting out of hand. You have explained why you find whitelotus' posting to be annoying and appear to be assessing his level of intelligence.

And you're entitled to but no, I don't think you'd really want mods deciding these things!

[Marshall McDaniel]

It's tough! You want to have a free open environment where people can have an open dialogue in an anonymous lassaiz faire setting. At the same time, you don't want any poster to insult, poke fun at, or demean anyone. You also don't want them to disrupt the general flow of the conversation, stray too far off topic when there are others in the forum clearly interested in the topic, etc. It's the old Liberty vs justice thing all over again...