The point we ended up arguing on is if saying someone might believe that communism hasn't really been tried yet is ad hominem or not

yes but that's not what I said, I've explained that now

"Today is the first time we've heard there are additional suspects out there, this contradicts what they have been saying, [Sheriff] Lombardo has said there are no other suspects," Maggie McCletchie, a lawyer for the media outlets said.

Okay, and what I've said regarding that is I think saying it is ad hominem because, at least in my mind, to believe that communism has not yet really been tried is such an absurd and, frankly, moronic position that it fails entirely as a level comparison

Like comparing an apple to a rotten and smashed to bits apple, they're not equivalent

obviously I disagree entirely with that, or I wouldn't have used it to make a point

Which is why I ended up just saying this is more or less just a back and forth, and all we can really do is agree to disagree

We're obviously not going to convince each other and won't get anywhere

that's not true, you're saying I used an ad hominem, and speculating on my motives

And I'm saying it's an ad hominem because your comparison fails in that comparing thinking a "hate crime" might actually have been done by the alt-right to believing that communism has not yet really been tried is an absolute shit comparison, especially when I said I'm going to look further into it. My position is in no way as absurd as saying communism hasn't been tried yet really.

I'll grant you that I said I'd look into it after the comparison

you've already said that, and it's just not true, they're entirely apt comparisons

but you've come back to it now to contest it

one belief is that in spite of 95+% of reported cases being hoaxes, this specific one might be worth reading about or looking into

the other belief is that in spite of 100% of the time failing miserably, it might work next time

they're entirely equivalent almost

No, because the scale of what's talked about is completely different. A "hate crime" that's nothing more than putting up a poster that's if you don't look into it, weird, and if you do look into it, neutral at worst. You are comparing this to the belief that a complete and utter fucking retarded *failure* of an economic system that would, in order to succeed, rely on either a total population of robots or a complete reworking of the human mind.

The former, it's entirely possible for either direction, we'd need to see more evidence to know for sure.

The second, we have the evidence. It just won't *work.*

ye no shit the scale is different, I that doesn't change the fact that the argument is entirely apt and requires the same belief

I purposely chose an absurd scale for _effect_ to make a _point_

Okay, so do you want to apply this belief to anything else, then?

listen, I don't give a fuck about the argument, what I care about is that you presume my motive and say I use ad hominems

How about a majority of women getting not guilty for crimes throughout history? Does this mean that if a women is arrested for a crime, she probably didn't do it?

I've laid out my explanation, and you can agree with it or not

but you _can't_ presume to disprove my motivation

[10:07 PM] folk: one belief is that in spite of 95+% of reported cases being hoaxes, this specific one might be worth reading about or looking into
[10:08 PM] folk: the other belief is that in spite of 100% of the time failing miserably, it might work next time
[10:08 PM] folk: they're entirely equivalent almost

I used that for effect, to make a point, I don't see how that can be an ad hominem

you can take it as such if you want, but that's not what it is

And I'm saying I don't agree, and we're never going to convince each other of the other's position, so let's just agree to disagree and move on

the _position_ is irrelevant, again, like I said, for now, I only care that you presume my motives and call my argument an ad hominem

You know what? Fuck it, I'll give you this and change my argument so you finally shut up about this.

You didn't think it was an ad hominem, I just disagree entirely that it was a valid comparison to show absurdity.

Okay, does that work? Can we finally move on with our lives?

yes, of course

Okay, thank you.

"In one section of the Paris metro, drug dealing and abuse has gotten so bad that some train drivers are refusing to stop at stations. Following a bad year for accidents and assaults, the trade union that represents workers of Paris transit body RATP warned last week that the North Paris stations on Metro Line 12—notably Marx Dormoy, Porte de la Chappelle and Marcadet – Poissoniers—are now so overrun with people selling and smoking crack that drivers no longer feel safe dropping off or picking up passengers there."

"When it comes to public drug sale and use, something is still shifting, and conditions are getting worse. Last year, there were 850 service interruptions on Line 12, ..."

I wonder what the relative concentration of immigrants is in those areas compared to the rest of paris