I'm fairly certain you don't think it's a lie, and you are just envious.
Either way, I don't see how any of this matters. I explained why I criticized the guy, and instead of working on that, you tried to undermine the anecdotal part.
Either way, I don't see how any of this matters. I explained why I criticized the guy, and instead of working on that, you tried to undermine the anecdotal part.
Also, it wasn't an ad hominem, since there wasn't any argument being debated. Get your fallacies straight.
I guess this is why you have 9999 submissions with 1 point. To be able to go around downvoting and incorrectly calling people out on a fallacy (the new trick you have learned).
I don't get it. What's the point of replying to a perceived false accusation of ad hominem with three more ad hominems?
"Get your fallacies straight", "I guess this is why you have ...", "(the new trick you have learned)"
I must have corrected the 'ad hominem' thing at least 5 times today, so I'm tired. It's not ad hominem if it's not trying to undermine an argument (it's just insulting or trolling), and it's not ad hominem either if it's relevant (eg: programmer does not know the basics, that fact comes to light, and is used against him in a programming discussion).
It's ok if that upsets you.