An ad hominem is specifically only when someone uses a personal attack to attempt to directly refute your argument.
And randomly claiming or bringing up the authenticity of what they think was said to be someone’s voice (as a form of a comeback) doesn’t fall under that?
_cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
No, that would probably be a strawman instead.
shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 1 week ago
Image
Alrighty then. By the way, I don’t even know where the recording would’ve come from.
It’s tragically comedic in an existential way that people could see something that does so much as be titled “so-and-so uses a prerecorded AI voice” and people don’t question them about it and just assume “someone put that there and applied it to someone, so it must be true”, almost like people came into the conflict ready to take one side seriously and the other side not seriously. That’s almost like the old trick kids do where they write their names on the wall with a pen (or graffiti if it’s outdoors) and watch as whoever is in charge assumes the culprit must be the person whose name was written on the wall. That’s where much of the engagement here comes from. For a lack of a better word, it’s existential.
Yeah, when I explain it that way, it does kind of sound like a strawman. I have, in response to this, set myself up to answer questions from my perspective in a way I thought would be amicable, but nobody ever obliges. They just see the strawmen and the attacks which try to inspire assumptions. I don’t go out of my way to “use” people, but for people who so easily find themselves accusing others of “manipulation”, this kind of bias comes off as highly manipulatable.