Hacker News Reader

I'm talking about situations where no fallacy has actually occurred, not situations where a fallacy has occurred but a correct conclusion has been arrived at anyway.

View on HN

That’d be a form of equivocation: the accuser is using an incorrect definition of the fallacy, instead of the true one.

I see what you mean. Just because you’re saying a person has a bad history doesn’t mean your committing an “ad hominem”. That seems different.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com