This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.182.157.6 (talk) at 16:53, 14 August 2005 (Repair Ladd vandalism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 16:53, 14 August 2005 by 67.182.157.6 (talk) (Repair Ladd vandalism)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Removing ad hominem attacks
Ad hominem comments by Sasquatch deleted. Admins should know that the policy is comment on content, not the contributors.
I recommend that you try to learn how to stick to discussion of the issues. Argument ad hominem is just another form of the logical fallacy of trying to create a diversion away from the issues genuinely under discussion. See informal logic.
20:41, 13 August 2005 (UTC) More ad hominem comments by Mr. Sucksquash deleted. As an admin he should know that the policy is comment on content, not the contributors. This is a content dispute. Stop trying to make it about the contributors.
Mr Sucksquash, like others on his side, resorts to the argument ad populum, "The majority is against you." Mr. Sucksquash needs to bone up on informal logic, where he will find such argument is logical fallacy, as is this continuous barrage of argument ad hominem from his side.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Ad_hominem An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally "argument to the man"), is a logical fallacy that involves replying to an argument or assertion by addressing the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/Argumentum_ad_populum In logic, an appeal to popularity (also called the appeal to the majority or the argumentum ad populum) is a logical fallacy that is committed when someone asserts that a proposition should be held to be true, or more plausible, merely because it is widely believed.
Majority control of content by force of numbers is not Misplaced Pages policy, consensus decision-making is, and In consensus decision-making we find, "True consensus involves meeting everyone’s needs (which in the case of Misplaced Pages means appropriate mention of all points of view in an article thus improving the quality of the article). Consensus decision-making is intended to deemphasize the role of factions or parties and promote the expression of individual voices."
See the diference between that and the point of view of those on your side, that tyranny of the majority is okay, that those of the majority point of view should control the content of an article through force of numbers? (See the recent history of truth and talk:truth for example.) --67.182.157.6 20:57, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 | This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. |