Chewbacca mom accused of white privilege

[GMDino]

(06-23-2016, 12:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Oh allow me to clarify and alleviate your confusion on the suggestion of attacking the message and not the messenger:

When you reply to a message and that reply is directly related to the original message then you are attacking the message, even if you through a little flair in there. For example:

Poster A: I would not hire a homosexual
Poster B: That is most likely because you are homophobic

While this reply points to the character of Poster A; it clearly is in direct response to the message; therefore, attacking the message.

When you reply to a message and that reply is not related to the original message then you are attacking the messenger. For example:

Poster A: Suddenly very interested in the specific study and the specific person. Answer my question and I'll answer yours. Sound fair enough?
Poster B: You're awfully pissy for a guy who still hasn't given me the answer for the cyclic rate for a M4.

or

Poster A: I think it only fair that the UK hold a vote to determine if they want to remain a member of the EU
Poster B: That’s because you are a racist, bigoted, homophobic idiot

Theses replies are in no way related to the topic at hand and brings up something from a totally unrelated subject; therefore, attacking the messenger.

Let me know if you require additional example for clarity, as I am sure I can find them for you. Perhaps in this very thread.

So are you saying calling people names and/or referring to things they have posted in other threads and/or dragging irrelevant details about their personal life into a discussion is "A" or "B"?

Also, would a person posting like "B" over and over while calling for such things to stop be simply a hypocrite or a dbag?

I'll eagerly await you to ignore me and not respond to me in a passive aggressive way.