IMO the most important part of learning fallacies is not to call them by name while debating. It’s to smell the bullshit from a distance. Both in the others’ reasoning and your own.

That’s what those Reddit kids are missing. This shit is not an “I won!” card. It’s a reasoning framework.

(Sometimes I do still call them out by name. But that’s usually a sign I’m already losing my patience with the muppet in question, and considering to block them [online] / turn 180° [offline] while saying “I’m not wasting my time further with you and your dumb shit”.

I don’t debate religion any more, though; unlike in my later teens + early twenties. Zealots get mentally tagged “irrational harmful avoid”, and the sort of person who believes with the brain but not the liver isn’t usually a problem.)

If anyone wants, I have practically the same picture, in a wallpaper format:

YDI + BPR. Yup, both.

You didn’t just say what instance the comm is in; you were clearly implying that it’s pointless to engage in good faith there. It falls squarely into rule #2 (be respectful, specially when disagreeing).

At the same time we know how poorly the .ml admin team reacts to things they disagree with. And, even if you were making the comm less welcoming, odds are that you weren’t banned for that, but because you rubbed off the admins the wrong way.

EDIT: it’s relevant to note that I’m often criticising the .ml admin team, as anyone can see here, here, here, here, here. As such, if I’m blaming the OP in this specific case, it’s because I genuinely believe that OP dun goofed. Is this clear?