News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook by relaytheurgency on Sunday June 26, 2016 @06:28PM (#11983099)
Is disagreeing with the style of someone's rhetoric really the same as an attack on the person? The parent comment is making the point that Stallman uses exclusionary tactics while speaking and that they are a turn off if you aren't already a convert. I think it's a cogent point and I think it applies in a more general sense to a lot of lazy techniques employed by those who seek to be divisive.
Re:Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook by programmarchy on Sunday June 26, 2016 @07:50PM (#11983421)
Re:Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook by trungaczne on Sunday June 26, 2016 @10:06PM (#11983808)
I don't think he dismissed the original argument ("Facebook is bad for you") at all, he's just commenting on the use of bad rhetoric and how it detracts from Stallman's goal of convincing people not to use Facebook.

I don't think everyone would listen to a person flinging insult, even if their argument has some basis. I wouldn't listen to a person who rely on bad rhetoric either.

Re:Reasons not to use (i.e., be used by) Facebook by ktRolster on Monday June 27, 2016 @02:32AM (#11984489)
Responding to tone is already reaching level 3 on the hierarchy: http://paulgraham.com/disagree.html

So it's better than it could be.