deleted by creator
Appeal to emotion fallacy.
No one said they’d be sad about it.
Brutal
I would be sad about it
" I own you, have absolute authority over you and don’t care about your opinion of it"
“Oh a forum mod”
AMAB
Even lemm.ee’s mods? That sucks.
I detect the fallacist’s fallacy.
What about the phallus’s fallacy?
She’s about to break both his arms.
Then he’ll need his mommy.
We’re on a different forum now.
These days the kids can buy a machine that does (up to) 700 strokes per minute.
Different forum but the same people.
I think it depends on the make, model and even the situation
Different strokes for different folks
Argumentum ad baculum
Cum laudely.
Ah yes, the mom with the good arms.
My mother would always just say “Fine then, don’t eat”, and then I’d get hungry later and she’d say that’s just too bad
“If you don’t eat you’ll regret it!”
“Slippery slope.”
Because of the implications?
For me it was “Fine then, dont eat” and i wouldnt eat anything
My porn acct name is finally relevant
The Phallusy Fallacy: “You’re dick, therefore fuck you.”
it’s pro hoc, not cum hoc. which is to not say that it is not objectively, very funny.
ha ha your mom hock my cum every night thru my jorts lol gottem
In this case, then, it would be pro hoc, since the crankiness comes after the not eating.
Right?
I though it was post hoc, ergo propter hoc? After the fact, therefore because of the fact?
Yeah, that’s what I mean.
The person I was responding to was comparing it to cum hoc which means that the two events being considered simultaneously, which I don’t think is correct.
deleted by creator
I think you might mean “post hoc…” which is a more specific case of “cum hoc…” and sets focus on time/order of events
