Then just state the conflict of interest instead of resorting to insults. The problem with your way of thinking is, sometimes your opponent is detestable, but that doesn't make them wrong. Kneejerk dismissal of an argument on the basis of character can be self defeating. You do not want to reflexively dismiss a point that is potentially salient just because the person making it is potentially "bad."

▲

rightbyte an hour ago | parent [-]

Sure from a philosophical standpoint I agree with you. But in practice you need to weight in trust. Bad faith retorics is just too expensive to engage.

The main problem with ad hominem is when ot is used as "Mr Y agree with you. Mr Y is bad. You are wrong". Like, 2nd order ad hominem attacks?

	▲	chungusamongus 9 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		You have done nothing to demonstrate how that's even relevant here. The person who posted this is not "bad" simply because they have used an LLM.
	▲	cindyllm an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[dead]