Quoting Grease Monkee welloiledmachine@gmail.com:
On Dec 20, 2007 1:53 PM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/12/2007, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
I think what you're actually seeing here is that the developers and sysadmins are much more motivated to make changes that reduce their workload and free them up for more important tasks (understandably, since we are very under-manned comparitively)
You're doing it wrong. You're supposed to start from an assumption of bad faith, fill in gaps in your own knowledge with the worst assumption you can think of, then extrapolate from there.
- d.
Oh dear David - still stooping to ad hominems. You make this list what it is.
This isn't an ad hominem. I suggest you look the term up. An ad homimen is "X said Y. But X is a Z, so Y is wrong". To use examples I've seen on this list: "X said Y. But X is (for/against BADSITES)(for/against spoiler warnings), (for/against eating babies (ok, haven't seen the last one on this list. Besides all sane people agree that babies are delicious)) so Y is wrong."
David's comment in contrast was a humorous remark not directed at anyone commenting on his perception of the general meta patterns of how people appear to constructing conclusions. Now if David had said "but X is assuming bad faith, so statement Y said by X must be wrong" then you might have a point.