On 5/4/2011 3:04 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
On 5/4/2011 2:29 PM, Michael Thomas wrote:
I should also expand that this entire situation started with Crocker
...
Right. It was all me. Another ad hominem. Nice.
...
As usual, wikipedia is a reasonable reference:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem>
Golly, Dave. I'm trying to figure out how history qualifies as ad hominem.
"Started with Crocker" points to the person. Simply and directly.
Further, you are using the reference as part of a claim that there is a problem
with a working group decision.
Hence you are attempting to pursue a criticism of that previous working group
decision by asserting that it is somehow relevant to note and emphasize who it
was that possibly initiated discussion.
I really do encourage you to read the definition of ad hominem in wikipedia.
Maybe it's the guilt by association section that has you all riled up?
That you think it relevant who proposed an idea and that you think it might
somehow create guilt is all the essence of ad hominem behavior, all of which
repeatedly go very, very far beyond permissible IETF participation behavior.
And now that I've supplied an exemplar for explaining and justifying a claim of
ad hominem, please note that you have not yet provided your own justification
for the claim that you put forward.
Will that be forthcoming anytime soon?
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html