Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
As the example in that post, I don't think what you're suggesting there makes sense. He didn't "play the man" in his response to me, he just responded to something other than what my post said. Essentially, it was a straw man, whereas what he's complaining about when he says "play the ball" is ad hominem.
Ironically, I'm pretty sure your question is also a straw man - he was suggesting that people in this thread were broadcasting their moral worthiness, not the grandchildren of residential school survivors (unless this thread is full of them, I guess).
... And further irony, if that is what he was suggesting, it's an ad hominem, because that would be imputing motive to undermine peoples' positions.
So, I guess... you're right for precisely the wrong reasons?
|
Your case would fall into "playing an entirely different ball."
As far as whether Cliff was talking about just the people in this thread, or people in general, multiple posts suggest the latter. But if in case it is the former, that does not in any way disable him from answering the question.
I don't even see how a question can be a strawman. I'm asking him if that's what he thinks. Should I have not left out the word "do"?