[studer]

Ok, I can see why it may be fun to counter something that partially reads like a personal attack on Magaziner with something that's definitely a personal attack on Peters (insert discussion about HN as a forum for spectator sports here), but do you also disagree with the argument about planning vs. doing that he's actually making?

[cal5k]

It's called an ad hominem argument, and it's one of the many well-known logical fallacies. For more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

[thaumaturgy]

Hah, and this is one of the few, few times that I've seen someone online correctly saying that an argument was ad hominem.

Can someone who knows Latin give me a name for the logical fallacy of incorrectly dismissing an argument as ad hominem?

[qjz]

Not so specific, but fecious reasoning is a broad spectrum disorder that might be applicable...

[ojbyrne]

From a quick dictionary lookup, "fecious" doesn't seem to be a word. Do you mean "specious?"

[qjz]

-ous: adjective forming suffix meaning "full of"

feces: sh*t

fecious: [I'll leave this as an exercise for the class]

[JangoSteve]

I think it's slang. I found a definition on an online dictionary with a less-than-stellar reputation (they have a poor Web of Trust score). They defined it as meaning "suspicious and feces-ridden". Heh.

[eds]

Fecious?

[eavc]

Whatever the latin for being wrong while trying to appeal to authority and intimidate someone would be.

If you want to coin it, seems like you can!