Uh, isn't quoting the wiki page on "ad hominem" ONCE in a thread enough? Why do it twice? And do you just run around posting "ad hominem" 100 times a day and downvoting opinions you disagree with?
You need to get it straight. If you say something nasty about Cato and I attack YOU personally, that's ad hominem. If you say something about Cato and I attack Cato or some of its supporters and explain why, that's not ad hominem, and no matter how many times you post a wikipedia page, that doesn't change.
> If you say something about Cato and I attack Cato or some of its supporters and explain why, that's not ad hominem
It depends on the explanation, specifically whether the attack goes to the substance of their position or, as in this case, "they're bad companies", which makes it ad hominem.
> And do you just run around posting "ad hominem" 100 times a day and downvoting opinions you disagree with?
It's easy enough to see that I haven't. I also haven't killed any puppies this week.
You need to get it straight. If you say something nasty about Cato and I attack YOU personally, that's ad hominem. If you say something about Cato and I attack Cato or some of its supporters and explain why, that's not ad hominem, and no matter how many times you post a wikipedia page, that doesn't change.