That'd be a "style-over-substance" fallacious argument. Or one could be hoping for a halo-effect to cloud the reader's opinion of their comment because some piece of software made it read like Enron-marketing-hogwash-speak.

▲

dbacar 9 hours ago | parent [-]

Sometimes the style is the substance. There is a reason people study rhetoric.

	▲	tadfisher 8 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		And that should be anathema to discussions rooted in reason.
	▲	AnimalMuppet 9 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		That's not substance. That's style being all there is, trying desperately to cover up the lack of substance. Rhetoric works best when it gives wings to strong ideas, not when it tries to fly by itself.