The Dread Metaplot

[Mike Holmes]

Uh - well in past "debates", the issue was "decided" without IMO as serious challenge to the counter-argument.  So some folk have a tendency to say "we've discussed this before" or "see the well discussed critiques of metap[lot in prior threads".  Metaplot has not, IMO, been adequately critiqued, and I'm afraid I consider calling the matter closed on that basis rather dishonest, or perhaps self serving.

Um, you just did it again. You insulted the person that you were responding to instead of arguing, saying that they are being "rather dishonest, or perhaps self serving." Raven wasn't saying that the topic is closed, just that he's refusing to respond to any posts that aren't polite. Which is not unreasonable. Instead of saying that these players "want to be spoon-fed", you might have said that they simply "prefer their materials to be presented in a way that makes it less difficult to use". This says the same thing without insulting the people who you are arguing with.

I agree with many of your points, and think that you potentially have a good argument. But you are presenting it poorly, IMO. The term for such attacks is Ad Hominems, and they are considered one of the classic logical fallacies. Attack the argument, not the one who makes the argument.

Mike

[xiombarg]

I agree with many of your points, and think that you potentially have a good argument. But you are presenting it poorly, IMO. The term for such attacks is Ad Hominems, and they are considered one of the classic logical fallacies. Attack the argument, not the one who makes the argument.

I think we're drifting a bit off-topic here. Regardless, Mike, if you agree with Gareth's points, perhaps you could re-present his argument in a non-pejorative way, perhaps adding points of your own? I think that would be a very positive contribution to this thread.