Talk:Strawman theory/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 22 September 2024. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Note

Note, we have a Straw man as well. --En attendant Godot 14:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Noted in the lead Ydam (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Nods. I added a disambiguation like thingy at the top, so it stands out more. Good article, had no idea about all this stuff. I just thought it was a few kooks with no argument. (not that i think this is a valid argument, but it's at least something besides what i thought was just "hell no i'm not paying, so there". ;-)--En attendant Godot 15:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

citations?--User:Brxbrx/sig 15:17, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Altered name bit

"No defence which relied on a misspelt or slightly altered name has ever been recognised by the courts—neither, we hope, would any sane person presume that they would."

Not true. See this - search for "not guilty, legally" in the text. Not a great source, but it's the best I can find online. I'd read this on dead trees which was why I tried to find a ref. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:01, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I think in 'certain courts of the Dark Ages and Middle Ages' exact descriptions were necessary for legal actions' - so 'X's billy goat ate my crops' would fail if X's goat was a jenny goat.

Surely the best way of dealing with the proponents is 'reversing the polarity' - so they become the butt of the strawman activity. 171.33.222.26 (talk) 15:46, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Capital letter names and ball printers

The talk about ALL CAPITAL NAMES reminds me of something that used to upset my grandfather a little bit. The old boy used to get upset whenever a bill came in that didn't include an apostrophe in his surname (Jim O'Neill) , and he'd often send them back saying "Jim Oneill doesnt live here, Jim O'Neill does however)". Realising that this was basically a grumpy old 80 year old , they'd often just send it back with the apostrophe added in by pen. Well it turns out there was a reason there would never be an apostrophe. Back in the day utilities and banks would use these big old type-ball and daisy wheel printers that often could only do A-Z, 0-9, and maybe a full stop , comma and period. As a result everything would be in upper case and feature only the minimum necessary punctuation. My suspicion is must of this gibberish about UPPER CASE documents stems from these old docs printed on early daisy wheel and TTY teletypes. Shayne.oneill (talk) 23:33, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

So you're telling me that the good old days were when the massive government conspiracy to print people's names in uppercase started? Shit, this goes deep. Cømяade FυzzчCαтPøтαтø (talk/stalk) 11:18, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

A case of 'reverse greengrocers apostrophe pedantry'?

And here is a fictional strawman. Anna Livia (talk) 17:29, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

This article itself s a strawman

For claiming to be rational, this entry has serious gaps in logic. Do all people who find the idea of legal fictions like corporations strange, seek to evade paying their debts? This article claims so. Also, just like Wikipedia offers a fossil record, might it be possible that the use of all caps is a fossil carryover from the early industrial age, in which all sorts of legal fictions were constructed to both limit and ascribe liability in the interest of capital I.e. making money? The fictional power of paper money itself seems strange and irrational. When people point out the strange legal inconsistencies that bind modern people self- proclaimed rational people call them cranks in articles like this. This article scratches the surface at best, and the last line is the most problematic because it asserts without any support whatsoever.^{— Unsigned, by: Fattigmann / talk / contribs} Requesting thread archival (why?) Plutocow (talk)