Commander
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 408
# 11
09-23-2013, 05:01 PM
Hm, I'm afraid I'm poster 14...
Once, I was simply called Mojo. Now, I'm forced into a new name, but don't be fooled, I'm the original STO Mojo!
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,118
# 12
09-23-2013, 05:07 PM
LOL

That really is every MMO forum ever.

It's always funny when posters 1 and 7 start throwing around phrases like "ad hominem", "logical fallacy", "strawman", and...and uh...there's another one I'm forgetting. Oh well, I'm sure it will pop up soon lol.
-Lantesh
Since Feb. 2009
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,043
# 13
09-23-2013, 05:07 PM
The mods should make a new forum rule.

From now on, we can only post P1, P2, P3....etc
I love nice long walks in the country.
Especially if they're taken by people who annoy me!
Ar ais olc leis an doer olc
Captain
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 937
# 14
09-23-2013, 05:18 PM
I am worried about how accurate this actually is.

I told you we're being watched *adjusts tin foil hat*

Harden up Princess
Looking for an Oceanic fleet? Check out our website:
www.ausmonauts.com
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,539
# 15
09-23-2013, 05:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lan451 View Post
LOL

That really is every MMO forum ever.

It's always funny when posters 1 and 7 start throwing around phrases like "ad hominem", "logical fallacy", "strawman", and...and uh...there's another one I'm forgetting. Oh well, I'm sure it will pop up soon lol.
That typically shows someone who is focusing on the actual argument being made rather than debating just to debate.

Ad hominem attacks attempt to attack the argument by discrediting the person making the argument. This is one step above actual name-calling. By attempting to discredit the poster, the idea is that if the poster is seen as unintelligent, morally corrupt, etc., that the argument being made is therefore corrupt and illogical.

Example: Poster 1: "I think Romulans need more warbirds. The current selection is rather light compared to the Federation." Poster 2: "You already have the Scimitar, which is the best ship in the game forever, why do you need more ships? It's people like you who ruin this game. You get a ship that can fire while cloaked, has a hangar, and a thalaron weapon, and you're here sitting and whining like a little kid asking for more. Maybe mommy and daddy should take away your credit card priviledges."

By attacking the poster and not the argument he makes, this is one of the most common logical fallacies. It doesn't address his original point, but instead goes towards the poster with a personal attack making him sound self-entitled, childish, or immature. The only thing worse than an ad hominem attack is name-calling which would be poster 2 just saying, "You're a child. Noone needs to listen to you."

Logical fallacies can be any number of things, but are not always limited to ad hominem attacks or strawman arguments. Typically someone accusing another of a logical fallacy is attempting to retaliate against their own argument being made. Depending on what the fallacy is, it either distracts from the original argument, or it clarifies that the counter-argument of a person should be disregarded.

Strawmen arguments are one of the more easily discredited logical fallacies. It attempts to tackle the argument by trying to discredit it through misrepresentation of a similar but fundamentally different point. This is where the 'strawman' point comes into play, since they are creating a fake person (or fake issue) to have an argument with who can not fight back.

Example: Poster 1: "I think the Romulans need more warbirds." Poster 2: "Why? Romulans are already best at everything forever with the warbirds they have. Cryptic should be making more KDF ships instead, we have very little ships. I bet you think it'd be just fine if the KDF didn't have any ships. lol"

The strawman is attempting to change the point of Romulan warbirds to KDF ships. Since it's basically known KDF ships have very few ships compared to the Federation, this isn't an argument that can really be fought, since the person is right -- but the point wasn't about KDF ships, it was about Romulan ships.

Another popular logical fallacy in the STO forums is the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. I've seen this used more often than either Ad Hominem attacks or Strawman arguments. The "No True Scotsman" argument is a very particular logical fallacy which I'm sure you've seen before. It basically has its origins in "What makes someone a scotsman?" "Well, all scotsmen should wear kilts. Any man from scotland not wearing a kilt isn't really a scotsman. He ignores his cultural heritage." This is despite the fact men from Scotland come from many walks of life with different beliefs and lifestyles. If you ask multiple people their opinions on what really makes a scotsman a scotsman, you'll come up with a variety of opinions and you won't find a single agreed-upon answer like "A man who was born/lives in Scotland.", since there are many ideas of what a scotsman should be. Thus, there is "No True Scotsman" because not a single person would fit everyone's definition.

It can apply to Star Trek in many ways, and has often been invoked to create the illusion that "something" isn't really Star Trek. "JJ Abrams isn't really Star Trek because lens flares." "Generations isn't really Star Trek because Kirk was killed off and everyone knows Kirk wouldn't die like that." "The Borg in STO aren't really the Borg because we can kill borg cubes in less than 10 seconds with our escorts." "The Federation isn't really the Federation because they ally themselves with the Romulan Republic who use thalaron weapons." "The Romulan Republic aren't really romulans because they're too much like the Federation."

Which isn't to say that the spirit of the ideas aren't particularly wrong, but it makes a blanket statement based on an extremely arbitrary measure which can often differ from person to person and their opinions that something isn't "really" something unless it has "this quality".

---

I actually enjoy debating, and it's not unusual to find people on the forums with poor debating abilities. The people you describe are either experienced at debates (maybe they were part of the debate team in school) or they've been properly schooled by a professional debater and are trying to throw those terms out without really knowing what they mean in an attempt to make themselves sound more intelligent than they are.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/image.php?u=91851766000&type=sigpic&dateline=13403  39147

Last edited by iconians; 09-23-2013 at 06:20 PM.
Captain
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,325
# 16
09-23-2013, 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldkirkfan View Post
The mods should make a new forum rule.

From now on, we can only post P1, P2, P3....etc
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
That typically shows someone who is focusing on the actual argument being made rather than debating just to debate.

Ad hominem attacks attempt to attack the argument by discrediting the person making the argument. This is one step above actual name-calling. By attempting to discredit the poster, the idea is that if the poster is seen as unintelligent, morally corrupt, etc., that the argument being made is therefore corrupt and illogical.

Example: Poster 1: "I think Romulans need more warbirds. The current selection is rather light compared to the Federation." Poster 2: "You already have the Scimitar, which is the best ship in the game forever, why do you need more ships? It's people like you who ruin this game. You get a ship that can fire while cloaked, has a hangar, and a thalaron weapon, and you're here sitting and whining like a little kid asking for more. Maybe mommy and daddy should take away your credit card priviledges."

By attacking the poster and not the argument he makes, this is one of the most common logical fallacies. It doesn't address his original point, but instead goes towards the poster with a personal attack making him sound self-entitled, childish, or immature. The only thing worse than an ad hominem attack is name-calling which would be poster 2 just saying, "You're a child. Noone needs to listen to you."

Logical fallacies can be any number of things, but are not always limited to ad hominem attacks or strawman arguments. Typically someone accusing another of a logical fallacy is attempting to retaliate against their own argument being made. Depending on what the fallacy is, it either distracts from the original argument, or it clarifies that the counter-argument of a person should be disregarded.

Strawmen arguments are one of the more easily discredited logical fallacies. It attempts to tackle the argument by trying to discredit it through misrepresentation of a similar but fundamentally different point. This is where the 'strawman' point comes into play, since they are creating a fake person (or fake issue) to have an argument with who can not fight back.

Example: Poster 1: "I think the Romulans need more warbirds." Poster 2: "Why? Romulans are already best at everything forever with the warbirds they have. Cryptic should be making more KDF ships instead, we have very little ships. I bet you think it'd be just fine if the KDF didn't have any ships. lol"

The strawman is attempting to change the point of Romulan warbirds to KDF ships. Since it's basically known KDF ships have very few ships compared to the Federation, this isn't an argument that can really be fought, since the person is right -- but the point wasn't about KDF ships, it was about Romulan ships.

Another popular logical fallacy in the STO forums is the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. I've seen this used more often than either Ad Hominem attacks or Strawman arguments. The "No True Scotsman" argument is a very particular logical fallacy which I'm sure you've seen before. It basically has its origins in "What makes someone a scotsman?" "Well, all scotsmen should wear kilts. Any man from scotland not wearing a kilt isn't really a scotsman. He ignores his cultural heritage."

It can apply to Star Trek in many ways, and has often been invoked to create the illusion that "something" isn't really Star Trek. "JJ Abrams isn't really Star Trek because lens flares." "Generations isn't really Star Trek because Kirk was killed off and everyone knows Kirk wouldn't die like that." "The Borg in STO aren't really the Borg because we can kill borg cubes in less than 10 seconds with our escorts." "The Federation isn't really the Federation because they ally themselves with the Romulan Republic who use thalaron weapons." "The Romulan Republic aren't really romulans because they're too much like the Federation."

Which isn't to say that the spirit of the ideas aren't particularly wrong, but it makes a blanket statement based on an extremely arbitrary measure which can often differ from person to person and their opinions that something isn't "really" something unless it has "this quality".

---

I actually enjoy debating, and it's not unusual to find people on the forums with poor debating abilities. The people you describe are either experienced at debates (maybe they were part of the debate team in school) or they've been properly schooled by a professional debater and are trying to throw those terms out without really knowing what they mean in an attempt to make themselves sound more intelligent than they are.

^ P1
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,539
# 17
09-23-2013, 06:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by steamwright View Post
^ P1
Stupid fanboys ruin everything.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/image.php?u=91851766000&type=sigpic&dateline=13403  39147
Captain
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,043
# 18
09-23-2013, 06:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
Stupid fanboys ruin everything.
That would be P 1:5 in the new forums...
I love nice long walks in the country.
Especially if they're taken by people who annoy me!
Ar ais olc leis an doer olc
Career Officer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,118
# 19
09-23-2013, 07:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by iconians View Post
stuff
Man, and after all of that you didn't even give me the one phrase that I was thinking of that I couldn't think of!

I am dissapoint.

Why are you not a mind reader?!
-Lantesh
Since Feb. 2009
Survivor of Romulus
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,539
# 20
09-23-2013, 11:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lan451 View Post
Man, and after all of that you didn't even give me the one phrase that I was thinking of that I couldn't think of!

I am dissapoint.

Why are you not a mind reader?!
I could have sworn it was the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Was it "Kettle Logic"? Using multiple inconsistent arguments in an effort to see if one of them sticks. "We don't need more Warbirds! We already have a bunch of Federation ships that Romulans can play up until 50! They already have the Scimitar which is the best warbird forever! The KDF don't have any additional ships, so the romulans shouldn't either!"

I've seen that on the STO forums a lot.

"Moving goalposts"? I use that one a bit. "Cryptic has never given the KDF anything!" "They gave you a revamped Qo'noS and shipyard." "Yeah, but we didn't get any new ships!" "You got the Bortasqu' variants." "Yeah, but we didn't get any ships after that!" "You got the Fleet Kamarag." "Yeah, but we didn't get any new consoles!" "You get Federation consoles in the reward packs for lockboxes." "Yeah, but the Federation got our consoles which means the KDF is worthless!" "You get the upper hand on the economy, since you get contraband easier and KDF doffs are worth much more than Federation doffs, typically." "Yeah, but noone plays KDF!" ... so on and so forth. Cite examples and watch them push the goal posts further in order to make it appear the original point has not been resolved.

"Argumentum Ad Nauseam" is something I've seen a few times in the STO forums. This is basically an appeal to the person to just stop posting, typically because a topic has been discussed so much before that we're really quite tired of debating it. Therefore, don't argue it to begin with.

Example: "I hate lockboxes, please give us everything for free." "Give it a rest, we've had this conversation a million times before. This isn't new ground, and you aren't getting lockbox ships for free."

... trying to think what other common fallacies are used in the STO forums often.
http://sto-forum.perfectworld.com/image.php?u=91851766000&type=sigpic&dateline=13403  39147
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:34 AM.