 | | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Oh, but it's long been extended beyond that. I'd agree with larry; any mention of nazis is grounds for losing. Check out the jargon file entry: Godwin's Law -- [Usenet] "As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party
|
|
(...) Nope. And your own citation disproves it. (...) Comparison != mention. Jasper (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
|
|
(...) Using an example/hyperbole involving the Nazis probably counts though. (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
|
|
(...) Consider this; perhaps it will help placate the pendant in you: the Nazi-thread-death convention is not Godwin's Law, merely derived from it. And as a tradition, it's often been that bringing Nazis into your argument in any way is grounds for (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
|
|
(...) Some claim so. I disagree. Sometimes I'm a pedant. Jasper (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Thread Nazis! (was Re: Goodness of Man? (was: Re: Merry Christmas from the Libertarian Party)
|
|
(...) <pedant>pedant</pedant> (...) I know. That corollary is mentioned in several places, though, and in its original form, and almost all others, refers only to Godwin's Law -Strict. (...) Often, yes, majority, no. Not that this is an issue for (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
