It's particularly interesting that someone concerned enough with logical fallacies to complain of ad hominem attacks can have "[he may be a Nazi sympathizer but let's listen to what else he has to say]" happily coexist with "[Some Hexbears say mean things so no one should listen to anything else that any of them have to say]".
The internetbro logical fallacy revolution and its consequences has been a disaster for human discourse.
This is not a formal debate so drop the pretense already.
Also note that labelling a Nazi sympathiser as "a defender of fascism" is not an ad hominem, that's a description. Just because you personally object to the label doesn't mean that therefore it's a logical fallacy.
Also note that there's no generally logical proposition in the statement of opinions. "I don't like mint icecream" could very well be considered an ad hominem against mint icecream by these clowns because anything they disagree with which is a statement of opinion counts as a logical fallacy in their eyes.
But if there's a layperson's discussion going on then the notion that the "debate" is focused on a particular topic and all responses must find themselves within the limits of that topic is, frankly, nonsense.
Yes, introducing your dislike for mint icecream to a discussion about politics is irrelevant but there's absolutely no need to use fancy logic terms like "red herring fallacy" when you can just say "that's not relevant" instead.
Likewise, throwing out a term like "ad hominem" is just a description and it's as useful as saying "that's an insult". Except it's way more pretentious and it provides the person who deploys that term with an inflated sense of purpose and logical correctness that saying "You insulted me" or "I disagree with your opinion" does not.
Imagine if these people decided to lose the pretense and got called a nerd then just responded with "that's an insult". Like, yeah, bro - congrats on figuring that out all by yourself, I guess?
The sooner that people lose "ad hominem" from their vocabulary, the better imo.
(Although on the other hand it's a wonderful red flag for indicating that you're dealing with a pompous, self-aggrandising dickbag who wants to exert complete control over the discussion, so maybe that term actually does have a good use for general discussions after all...)
I actually felt kind of bad for that person. They seem like an obsessive with an unhealthy internet habit. Like I thought we were terminally online? I've never once collected a screenshot album of grievances.
Folks, do yourself a favor and go outside occasionally.
Yeah, it's a huge thread with an album of 50 something screenshots of Hexbears disagreeing with them or just posting emojis like
It's a massive post with like multiple paragraphs and chapter splits and references to UN charters, all complaints about Hexbear. Accusations we're doing hate speech and genocide denial. I don't wanna link because I'm nervous about getting accused of brigading, and I actually am worried about this person.
Maybe try not being a disingenuous condescending western imperialist nazi apologist?
Really says it all by the focus on “winning”. Doesn’t even care what is right or using different viewpoints to get to the truth of a matter. That’s explicitly engaging in bad faith.
This tracks if you ignore the part where they completely ignore all the good faith responses from us and just regurgitate the same thought-terminating cliches over and over again until the end of time.
If they want an actual argument in return they should say something worthwhile.
If they're just gonna post a link to the cia's website saying socialism is bad and all the times we support fascists was good, this is what they're gonna get.