On: Judge says domain name loss is not a "substantial ...

[catshirt]

he did: "[suggest] that it was the judge's age that caused him to make an error"

he didnt: "[use] the judge's age in support of the first argument"

forgive me; perhaps you could clarify the difference?

[starwed → catshirt]

It is the difference between

> My opponent is an idiot and believes X to be true, therefore X is false. (ad hominem)

and

> X is false. My opponent believes X to be true, therefore they are an idiot. (Not ad hominem.)

[Dylan16807 → catshirt]

It was a side note and not part of the argument.

[jcc80 → Dylan16807]

Is this a first year philosophy class? Reminds me of kids in law school. Ad hom this, straw man that...pointless discussion. We can all go look up the definitions if we want & decide for ourselves. Let it go & discussion the actual issue.

Fact is having a second means to communicate (a .me or whatever address) doesn't mean speech isn't an issue here.

http://www.thedomains.com/2011/08/05/federal-court-rules-dom...