I wouldn't say extreme, but fundamental. I referenced the Nuremberg Principles because they are so fundamental and I genuinely don't know a better example.
Several people in the community misuse down-votes. They down-vote on-topic, constructive and serious discussions which disagree with their opinion instead of simply articulating their criticism.
I suppose because "Godwin's law" is in the dictionary now you are free to add meaning as you like, but I wouldn't be happy about this stackoverlow like meta trivial pursuit at the expense of logic if I were Godwin.
So if he's not happy, he's only got himself to blame.
The most extreme example of a thing you can find is not usually the ideal example to use for most contexts. Rather than clarifying things, if it dwarfs the context, it then appears automatically ridiculous even if the basic argument is sound.
This is not an example for official upholding of personal responsibility.
> there are millions of better examples for this context.
This is hand-waving. I used the Nuremberg trials specifically to not hand-wave.
Now that is funny, though I suspect unintentionally, and in horrifically bad taste either way.
I did not intend to be funny nor do I see why it was bad taste.
My question for a better example was genuine.
It was meant as a pejorative label for him stating
there are millions of better examples for this context
I provided a valid example.
I asked for "a better example where personal responsibility was officially upheld". Your example was explaining a child agency, which _does not_ include officially upholding personal responsibility.
Furthermore, I did not draw any comparison between the Nuremberg Trials and the case in question, but used them only to substantiate my argument for personal responsibility. Reread what I wrote if you are doubting.
Don't assume everybody does cheap puns and invalidly makes up connections between what was said. If I mean it, I say so.
Add an adult to the story then. Hell, add a teacher, knock yourself out. For making the point of not merely doing as instructed though and having personal responsibility, this need for official confirmation in the metaphor seems awfully weird.
Don't assume everybody does cheap puns and invalidly makes up connections
I didn't, I said I thought you were probably being unintentionally funny.
Add an adult to the story then. Hell, add a teacher, knock yourself out.
For making the point of not merely doing as instructed though
and having personal responsibility, this need for official
confirmation in the metaphor seems awfully weird.
It is not a metaphor.
However, I think we were just misunderstanding each other. My question was serious and genuine.
They probably feel that the Nuremberg trials are a hyperbolic example here, and worry that line of argument brushes a little too close to Godwin's Law.
Upshot, we probably all agree with you that everyone has personal responsibility for their actions. There are still situations where we want attorneys to listen to their clients though.