Ben Bonds

An ad hominem isn't just any time you say something mean about someone. An ad hominem is when you say that some thing someone believes is wrong on the basis of some irrelevant personal characteristic. ("John may tell you that the Higgs-Boson exists but he is a convicted felon!")

This may be sarcastic, it may not portray RMS in a good light (I disagree: I think everyone knows RMS is principled to the point of pig-headed; it doesn't change my opinion of RMS at all, just simply confirms what I already know). But it isn't an ad hominem.

People claim things are ad hominem falsely so often that some people have even started referring to it as The 'Ad Hominem Fallacy' Fallacy. http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html ;-)

It's actually not an ad hominem. A firm grasp of language, grammar, and communication is actually recognized, albeit informally, to be a good signal of technical skill and design effectiveness. If he can't refine his linguistic communication well enough to convey such a simple sentence, how can he be expected to refine his visual communication (i.e., UX design) well enough to surpass one of the leading UX teams in the industry?

There are further reasons it's not an ad hominem - I recommend you read The Ad Hominem Fallacy Fallacy [1]. I don't mean to criticize - I made the same mistake until recently, so I offer the article in a spirit of goodwill, not superiority.

[1]: http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html

Ad hominem attacks are when you imply that someone's argument is invalid because of their background. That's what makes it a fallacy -- the validity of someone's argument is completely unrelated to their personal qualities.

http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html

In contrast, when someone offers an anecdote about their experiences, or in general offers their subjective judgement, then knowing something about them is damn important! For instance, if I knew MOC was a compulsive liar, that would certainly be relevant. Likewise, if MOC was in general an optimist who was loath to ever say anything negative, that would lend extra weight to their comments on grad school.

You're falling prey to the Ad Hominem Fallacy Fallacy:

http://plover.net/~bonds/adhominem.html

That this is a link-baiting article is not part of my argument. It's a simple observation. The very title of his article is an insult to Apple users.

Did you read past the first sentence of my comment, to—oh, let me see—the second sentence of my comment, where I explain what my problem with his "argument"—i.e. series of insults—is?