[Sca-cooks] Starter went 'Pffft'

[Daniel Myers]

On Nov 30, 2004, at 9:06 PM, Chris Stanifer wrote:

> It isn't just Adamantius and Bear you are
>> arguing with, you see... it's American bread experts in general.

What follows is referred to as "Substantive Distractions" or "Argumenta 
ad hominem" in an attempt to shift attention into an attack on an 
opponent rather than over the issues of a debate.

> It's a few people 'who write about bread' in general.  Other 'experts' 
> agree with me.


> And, quite frankly, you ain't an expert.

Argumenta ad hominem (argument to the person)  -  an abusive 
denunciation.

> Adamantius and I are in the process of finding some common ground on 
> the subject (I think), and if he chooses to continue the debate, then 
> I will do so.  But with him..not you.  You have resorted to personal 
> attacks on me and my professional experience, both of which you know 
> absolutely NOTHING about.  When you can make a simple Bechamel sauce, 
> then you can speak to me about cooking.  Until then, I am through with 
> you on this subject.

Argumenta ad crumenam (argument to the purse)  -  the implication of 
the above sentences is that being a professional chef is a criterion of 
correctness, and that therefore only professional chefs are capable of 
having a valid opinion.

> Now, THAT was grandstanding.
>
> William de Grandfort

No, instead of "grandstanding", I believe that more appropriate terms 
would be "rude", "childish",  and "unchivalrous".


- Doc


-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  Edouard Who Is Not Lainie's Edouard (Daniel Myers)
  http://www.medievalcookery.com/
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-