[Eisenstein]

Since it takes a whole lot of effort to defend oneself against an accusation I think people should spend at least a little bit of effort when making one.

If you can't explain why you are invoking No true Scotsman and how it applies, then I don't think you should be accusing the parent of it.

[Dilettante_]

That's fair, it just jumped out so strongly to me that I didn't think to explain.

The implicit "no true scotsman" statement was "The people who 'took over and perverted' all these technologies were the creeps, None of the people who were there before this 'takeover' were considered creeps by anyone no sir, all upstanding Scotsmen each and every one of them. (And if there was a creep, he was obviously part of the 'takeover')."

[graemep]

I can see you might read it that way, but, to clarify, I am arguing that it was not'"the best thing that ever happened to the so called "creeps"' at that point, rather than "there were no creeps". TO put it another way its postive impact was greater relative to the negative.