No soup for you! - signed, the Soup Pedant.

–Mike

That’s not a bad argument, but it would be more convincing if your use of the word “Nazi” to describe those who ask people not to use the word “Nazi” because it’s a personally painful for them weren’t so inappropriate.

A better word for your usage is “pedant.”

The sad thing is that most people invoking Godwin’s Law don’t even understand Godwin’s Law. Andre Friedman wrote:

“He doesn’t know that his invocation means the argument is over. By tradition, the invoker has witlessly announced that he’s lost the debate.”

No. Godwin’s law ONLY states that as a thread grows longer, the likelihood of someone invoking Hitler approaches 1 to 1. It DOES NOT state that the argument is over. It does not mean the person invoking Hitler has lost the debate.

Look at the reality - invoking Hitler or Nazis certainly does not end an argument. All the evidence points to the contrary. Invoking Hitler usually prolongs the argument, and makes new arguments blossom and prosper.

Another sad aspect of Godwin’s mis-application is that quite often people are shunned or are told they have “lost the argument” when they make references to Hitler that are apt.

APT!

Please, help end the abuse of Godwin’s Law. Reclaim nazi-related words in your vocabulary. Don’t be silenced by the Nazi Nazis.

Both mistakes which Maynor has (belatedly) acknowledged and regretted. But mistakes they willingly chose to make, because they wanted to make a point. So, I’m sorry to say this but, Maynor brought all this upon himself.

Imagine: if he and Ellch had simply stuck to their original premise, none of this angst would have happened. If you recall, their original premise was that this could be done on ANY platform, not just Apple. It’s not about the operating system per se, it’s really about wireless networking technology.

But, you know… they just didn’t have an ashtray lying around their hotel room so they thought ah what the heck, those dewy eyes will do just as well.

And let’s face it: Maynor (I suspect) is a adept at PR. He went after the juiciest target to get the maximum coverage. I’ve read about him and he sounds like a nice guy, but heck, he deserves what he wrought.

They just thought Ou’s comments were idiotic. A reasonable conclusion, that. When a guy uses his previous lame assertions as evidence to support his current lame assertions, you have to wonder if he’s lacking some iodine in his thyroid.

But George has been exhibiting clinical symptoms of mental illness for a while. Delusions of grandeur, paranoid tendencies, conspiracies involving large organizations out to “get” a small group of select insiders. The list goes on.

‘Cheapens’ would normally mean devaluing something good.

‘Trivializes’ would be a better word.