RaphaelSchmitz comments on 'If you can’t show your game to the world without fearing it’ll be cloned, something’s broken' says Moonlighter studio on its canceled demo

[–] RaphaelSchmitz@feddit.org 6 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

For anybody else reading this, this fallacy is called "moving the goalpost".

One could also argue for "motte and bailey", but that's less clear.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 4 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Not really a motte and bailey I don't think, motte and bailey requires 2 positions one untenable and one irrefutable, in this case he just got provided evidence then changed his standard for being proven wrong which is 100% moving the goalpost.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] RaphaelSchmitz@feddit.org 4 points 12 hours ago (1 child)

Well, what one could argue is that "Tetris isn't number one" was the untenable position, and "capitalism has sold more overall" was the irrefutable one.

Oh well, the 2 fallacies are very similar with a big overlap, but if I may summarize it down to the point that I find most important:

If someone is proven wrong and they don't take full responsibility for that (e.g. by trying to quickly push the discussion somewhere else where they're not wrong), talking to them won't lead you to the truth.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 hours ago

I heard a good argument for it that you can still learn something from it and it also teaches you how to argue against people who are being bad faith, but you also have to be aware that they're doing it. Though generally yeah most of the time it's going to be boxing with ghosts xp

permalink

fedilink

source

parent