[odf-discuss] logical fallacies - Rick Jelliffe FUD?

[Lars D. Noodén]

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007, robert_weir at us.ibm.com wrote:
> "Standards activist" -- what does that mean?

Name calling is a standard strategy among many groups that cannot 
otherwise advance their interests, not just the MS movement.  It's usually 
used as a supplement to lobbying and various backroom deals helped out 
with delay tactics.  The main point is to distract from the issues being 
discussed and if possible put the opponent on the defensive.

It's often used by those whose argument doesn't have a leg to stand on 
factually or logically speaking.  So in this case, it behooves us to see 
past it and press on with a discussion of the facts.

If the name calling needs to be addressed at all, then let's address if 
for what it is: a logical fallacy

MS boosters and astroturfers spout the same lines / disinformation again 
and again that it almost seems like there is an official play book that 
gets updated occasionally, with regular replays of old, already 
discredited material that gets picked up anew by the media.

See any number of summaries of logical fallacies, such as Stephen's guide 
mirrored here:
 	http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/toc.htm

I guess the good part is that they are so consistent that most of their 
arguments could be codified and a lookup table provided for how to shoot 
down the bs.  Over the last 10 years I've seen very little new material 
in this regard out of the MS movement, so a lookup table would be useful 
for many groups: closed source (non-MS), open source, and open standards.

Common fallacies used by MS boosters and astroturfers :

    * Ad hominen (changing the subject): person is attacked rather than the 
idea
 	e.g. dirty GNU hippy RMS, linux zealot, *-activist

    * Equivocation (fallacy of Ambiguity): the same term is
    used with two different meanings
 	e.g. OpenOffice.org <=> Opendocument

    * Straw Man: an argument different from (and weaker 
than) the opposition's best argument is attacked

    * False dilemma (distraction): two choices are presented as the only 
choice and mutually exlusive at that, when in reality several choices 
exist

    * Non-sequitur: if A then B, Not A, thus Not B; if A the B, B, thus A;
or even asserting that contraditory statements are true;

In short, name calling works if we let it work.

-Lars

Lars Noodén
 	Ensure access to your data in the future
 	http://www.noooxml.org/