Well, I don’t have any idea what to do with the guy who just lies into my face. Especially when he got the power to ban me just because he feels like that.
Apparently, lesswrong.com is not a place for any discussions.
The Courtier’s Reply is an alleged type of logical fallacy, coined by American biologist PZ Myers, in which a respondent to criticism claims that the critic lacks sufficient knowledge, credentials, or training to pose any sort of criticism whatsoever.[1] It may be considered a form of argument from authority.
And? I think established by the fact that I am in charge, I am the authority of the slack. So yes. I can make decisions about what makes my garden a nice garden. It’s significantly less of a fallacy if I am actually the authority here.
I’ve been courteous by responding here but I really don’t have to—Tapping out.
Appeal to the authority is a bad, invalid argument. However, it doesn’t look like you give a flying duck for good argumentation at all.
So far, your “garden” looks like an extremely toxic place that has nothing to do with rational thinking. I definitely don’t mind that you do whatever you want with your personal channel, just don’t use this misleading title. It’s a not channel about rationality, it’s one certain guy’s personal fan club.
And by the way, I remember you wrote that you don’t ban people often. Now I think that you lied about this too.
Well, I don’t have any idea what to do with the guy who just lies into my face. Especially when he got the power to ban me just because he feels like that.
Apparently, lesswrong.com is not a place for any discussions.
I told you what to do. Go find somewhere else to talk to people. Come back when you have some humility|curiosity about your own knowledge.
Courtier’s response: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtier%27s_Reply
And? I think established by the fact that I am in charge, I am the authority of the slack. So yes. I can make decisions about what makes my garden a nice garden. It’s significantly less of a fallacy if I am actually the authority here.
I’ve been courteous by responding here but I really don’t have to—Tapping out.
Appeal to the authority is a bad, invalid argument. However, it doesn’t look like you give a flying duck for good argumentation at all.
So far, your “garden” looks like an extremely toxic place that has nothing to do with rational thinking. I definitely don’t mind that you do whatever you want with your personal channel, just don’t use this misleading title. It’s a not channel about rationality, it’s one certain guy’s personal fan club.
And by the way, I remember you wrote that you don’t ban people often. Now I think that you lied about this too.
Tapping out
Just do it, then. Go and enjoy your personal fan club.