The Fallacy of the Name Flame: “Huhhuhhuh! I c’n make a dirty word outta yer name so your argument’s wrong!”
Fenris
You have no idea what you’re talking about, Fenpoop.
The Sandbagging Argument: I’ll give my explanation once some more people have had a chance to respond.
I guess this falls under the ‘appeal to invisible authority’, but have we forgotten this one?
“I can’t provide proof that we have bases on Mars because it is top-secret confidential for-my-eyes-only matter-of-national-security information, and the CIA would kill both of us. But you can believe me - I work for the government.”
Is this related to the “Stall while registering a sock puppet” maneuver?
Did we forget the Kook Motto?
“You can’t prove it didn’t happen!”
No, more like “I can’t express myself well enough to convince anybody so I’ll wait until somebody who knows how to write comes along and I’ll just say, ‘Yeah, that’s what I meant’”, or “I’m not sure whether or not my opinion will get me flamed to radioactive ash, so I’ll see which way the wind blows before I either post my explanation or run away and hide until the thread drops off the radar.”
Rosewood mentioned this, but didn’t name it: argumentum ad exclamation: the fallacy that lots of exclamation points equals evidence? (“I’m telling the truth!!! Frogs are native to Mars!!!”)
Fenris-
What about the other quotes? I did not mention your name, but since you seem to enjoy flaming, let me ask you: Why are you such a hypocrite?
People in glass houses really shouldn’t throw stones…
Great. Now I won’t stop giggling until tomorrow.
Rule ## - “Enough Said” or its lamer variant “'Nuff Said”.
Here, you don’t know me but I am the worlds foremost expert in _______. My post is so self evident that I need not support it with any sort of collaborative evidence.
My post is so universally logical that there is no way to deny it, and just in case you missed it, I will now prove it by ending the conversation with “'Nuff Said”.
I thought the Kook Motto was: “You just think that because you’re circumcised.” I am soooo confused now…
OOooh! Hostile-Lad now take his evil revenge on me. Please, Hostile-Lad, stop your reign of terror! You’ve attacked Green Bean** and (granted, with some justification) Otto. Please spare me, lest I faint from sheer horror!
And, to everyone else, I invite you to read the (I believe) single thread (here) that has the out-of-context, semi-forged quotes that Hostile-Lad used. You can see that he’s chopped words out of quotes, removed them from context etc. Frankly, I’m not sure what his point is, since I stand behind what I actually said and no-one in the original thread seemed upset by them (although there was surprisingly polite disagreement).
Hostile-Lad, propagandists who butcher quotes for their own ends aren’t popular.
And, Hostile-Lad, if you want to debate the quotes you’ve edited, the thread’s open with the complete text and context of those quotes. Feel free to discuss them there. Maybe I’ll even bother to respond.
Fenris
At first blush, these seem mutually exclusive, but you see both:
The Ghost of Threads Past: “Man, I should have known that a dumbfuck who would support Gore wouldn’t be able to understand the fine detail of particle physics! Get out of GQ!” This holds even when somebody has really, really crashed and burned in a previous thread. We’ve all done it, and many of us would have had to leave, tail between our legs, if we couldn’t rely on the selective amnesia of our peers, who kindly give us the chance to start over each thread. People do learn. Furthermore, in a message board this size those sorts of tactics quickly start to seem cliquish–to newbies it looks like if you don’t know everything about everyone you might as well not bother.
The Fallacy of Infinite Forgetfullness: While it’s true that everyone is allowed the occasional blooper, forgetfulness isn’t instant nor automatic. For example, you cannot start out a thread billowing out racist tripe, get corrected, give a glancing apology for the most explicit language (while making sly commments about the PC police) and then expect people to overlook the side of you that you just revealed in that very same thread. After making a serious ass of yourself, you have to make some effort to show that you have learned, not just that you are avoiding an arguement you can’t win.
Lastly, this is a very specific type of sure-fire arguement loser:
In popularity threads, posting “No one ever mentions me in these threads” means that you lose the “I am popular” arguement you are trying to make. There is no shame in being overlooked–hell, I’ve been posting here steadily (brilliantly, at times) for two fucking years, and it is only in the last couple of months that I have felt myself begin to be established as a recognizible persona. Whinning about how you have 250 posts and no body loves you just makes you look pitiful. Have faith: post things worth reading and people will remember what you say, even if they don’t rememeber who said it. And that is what matters, really.
…and you were who again? Mandolin Joe? I never heard o’ Madyline Joan.
Fenris, who does know who Manda JO is, but couldn’t pass up the opportunity.
Ok…
After some thought (and some calming and wise words from a friend - thanks Friend-Who-Shall-Remain-Nameless!), I’d like to offer an apology to leander.
While I don’t agree with him jumping (IMHO) on Green Bean and I really don’t like the out of context quotes thing, it should be pretty obvious that I was “baiting” (from my friend’s comments) him and thus share any blame for this unpleasantness.
Ergo, let me offer an honest apology for my part in this derailment of an otherwise funny thread as well as another apology for my last post to him. I’m old enough to know that one doesn’t calm a fire by pouring gasoline on it!
So, honest apology said, let me try to get this thread back on track by being the first to offer a laurel…and hardy handshake 
to leander with an offer to bury the hatchet (but preferably not in one of our heads!)
Truce, leander?
Fenris
No problem - I would hate to be the cause of anyone’s vexation - honestly.
As for the joke, I guess I just didn’t get it 
hostile-lad
One that you forgot :
Proof by Unanalyzed Higher Authority
Entire body of message consists of Bible quote. Often used more than once consecutively.
A variation of this is the SOCAS debate tactic of posting an entire quote from Thomas Jefferson or his ilk.
Don’t forget Godwins Law, ya bunch of friggin Nazis!
Post Loser ergo Propter Pathos (After the Loser therfore because of the Pathos): “Th’ only reason people are siding with you is that you’re popular. If anyone liked me, they’d side with me. But no one does. I’m gonna go eat a bug an’ THEN you’ll be sorry.”
It has as it’s correlary: Authority Hates Pathos: “Mods only like the popular posters and so they’re pickin’ on me! I’m gonna go eat a bug an’ THEN you’ll be sorry!”
Fenris