> This is by far my highest upvoted post in this thread, even higher than ones that exhibit much stronger "virtue-signaling"
argumentum ad populum [1]
> In it effort to save myself some time (seriously, you're asking me for about 20 minutes worth of work)
Making a worthwhile, intellectual contribution to a public forum should take more than 20min of work/preparation. Being familiar enough with the contents of the paper to make an informed arguement should mean that you could easily pull quotes (maybe with ctrl+f to save time) in less than a minute. Especially when your comments have the potential to destroy someone's reputation/career.
> Also, do the other replies to you make things a little clearer? Please keep in mind I'm not trying to be passive-aggressive
Congratulations, you can make fallacy ridden, condecending, and harmful comments without even trying!
> I come from similiar intellectual stock to you.
Irrelavant and you most likely do not.
> That's why I'm in disbelief that you need pullquotes and an explanation to tie them together, I'm sure it'll click for you without that.
argumentum ad hominem [2]
I know it's easy to write off when someone pulls up latin fallacy names, but please do read those wiki articles. Formal arguementation is important. Your reply to me was disrespectful and added absolutely no value to this thread.
