So, you realize this is not how probate works in modern society, right?
As to “ad hominem,” doesn’t that term usually refer to a fallacy about an argument? Procrustus’s statement appears to be phrased as though he intended it as an observation. Correct me if I’m wrong,*but I don’t think that observations are subject to logical fallacy criticisms.
As to “reporting you,” I know that the moderators do not as a general rule respond privately to the person who reported a post, but just in case they do in your case, please share with us the feedback you receive. 
*By “correct me if I’m wrong,” I mean, “tell me why the belief I stated is incorrect.” Don’t just say “you’re wrong”; that would be notifying me, and that’s not what I’m asking for.
I was answering a question, not giving a law lecture…
Did you miss that I asked specifically if there is TODAY any practical point in…&c? No big deal if you did, but I would appreciate you giving your response in light of that very important word being taken into account.
Right, so the usage of the term bastard has changed over time- from a legal status descriptor to not being used that way… right?
I have no idea, and it has nothing to do with the ‘meaning’ of the word. The same with ‘computer’. It means ‘that which computes’. People use the word ‘computer’ to refer to ‘digital electronic computers’, but that is a sort of abbreviation for the sake of convenience.
What does determine the meaning of a word?
Fallacy of moving the goalposts.
You can’t even keep your own arguments straight.
ETA:
Marriage: It means (strict definition here) the formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.
People use the word “marriage” to refer to any union between consenting adults that confers the same legal protections.
How is what I wrote any different than what you wrote about computers? (And do not say that it’s a definition that’s been forced from extremist so it doesn’t count. That’s simply not true.)
The same with people who call photography ‘art’. Photography is not and cannot be ‘art’, any more than a fossil can be ‘art’. People can and in fact do use words incorrectly.
Fallacy of being wrong.
And what determines the correct usage of a word?
Actually it’s the fallacy of wow, you seriously think you’re the only person who is allowed to have an opinion on what anything is.
What a crazy assertion. Photography is influenced by human intervention to create a unique aesthetic that a fossil doesn’t have.
I can see it now. Melchior gets a warning for insults and uses as his defense “But it’s not an insult. It’s a legal status. You don’t get to change the meaning of words.”
This is false – the word “computer” has changed in usage, and therefore in meaning. Now it means “digital electronic computer”, among other things.
Reading his posts in other threads, yes, I do believe he thinks that.
Just yesterday I was looking at a translation in which the translator referred to ‘honor’ being ‘depleted’. We don’t use ‘depleted’ that way. Honor cannot be ‘depleted’.
Here is the passage:
The truth is: not out of, but inside compassion — I mean what customarily and misleadingly passes for compassion — we are thinking about ourselves, no longer consciously, to be sure, but very powerfully so unconsciously, just as, when our foot slips out from under us, we initiate, without any immediate consciousness of the action, the most purposive counter movements and in the process plainly make use of our entire faculty of understanding. The other person’s accident insults us, it threatens to deliver us into the hands of our own impotence, perhaps even our cowardice were we not to offer our help. Or the accident per se involves a depletion of our honor in the eyes of others or of ourselves.
Here is how I translated it:
The truth is that in our pity — I mean that which we erroneously call ‘pity’ — we no longer think consciously of ourselves, but do so quite unconsciously, just as, when we lose our footing and start slipping, we instinctively make the proper movements to regain our balance, and in doing so obviously employ all of our faculties. A mishap to another represents an affront to us; it would reveal in us impotence, or perhaps cowardice, if we were to do nothing to help him, or bring humiliation and dishonour upon us.
Here is the original:
Die Wahrheit ist: im Mitleid — ich meine in dem, was irreführender Weise gewöhnlich Mitleid genannt zu werden pflegt, — denken wir zwar nicht mehr bewusst an uns, aber sehr stark unbewusst, wie wenn wir beim Ausgleiten eines Fusses, für uns jetzt unbewusst, die zweckmässigsten Gegenbewegungen machen und dabei ersichtlich allen unseren Verstand gebrauchen. Der Unfall des Andern beleidigt uns, er würde uns unserer Ohnmacht, vielleicht unserer Feigheit überführen, wenn wir ihm nicht Abhülfe brächten. Oder er bringt schon an sich eine Verringerung unsrer Ehre vor Anderen oder vor uns selber mit sich.
That is short-hand. The *word *‘computer’ *means *‘that which computes’.
I think he broke.