There's a Petition to Stop Phil Collins From Coming Out of Retirement

[Orrex]

112. Well, now you're just making stuff up.

Did I call anyone a "music snob"?

No. I did not. Irrelevant.

Did I say that you called anyone a "music snob?" No, I did not.

However, since you're complaining about the other people whom you infer to have insulted Collins' fans, it is reasonable to call out the actual insults hurled by those fans (i.e., calling other people "music snobs&quot . Whether or not the insults came from you is not important, since we weren't only discussing you.

Just as it is interesting that you're so quick to infer insult, it's interesting that you imagine that the discussion must only (or chiefly) be about you. Hmm...

Saying "this sucks" is an assertion of an objective truth about the music.

That's simply false, and it's intellectually dishonest of you to assert it as true. Even when someone asserts, for instance, that Collins' music is so awful that it's killing the Great Barrier Reef, this is clearly an expression of the person's opinion, embellished with hyperbolic exaggeration.

Also, if you pretend that a statement about Collins' terrible music "is an assertion of objective truth," then you must accept that calling someone a "music snob" is a statement of "objective fact" as well. Why do you tolerate this latter declaration while condemning the perceived insult of the former?

Saying "I don't like this" is a declaration of one's opinion.

No, it's a statement of fact. That is, it is a fact that I don't like Phil Collins' music. In contrast, it is my opinion that Collins' music is so bad that it could be used to break prisoners for whom waterboarding is too gentle. See the difference? It is not even necessary for one to state "in my opinion" explicitly, because it's unlikely that they would expect anyone to mistake their opinion for alleged fact, even if the opinion is strongly held.

The former is inherently offensive to people who like the music in question,

No, nothing is inherently offensive to anyone. Offensiveness is subjective and inferential, and it may or may not be justified, but it is not inherent.

since it implies that they fail to understand the objective fact of the "suckage."

That may be your inference, but that's on you.

The latter offends no one, since it recognizes that there are differences of opinion.

Unless your opinion is so privileged that it's necessarily entitled to protection from exposure to other opinions, you'll need to accept that other opinions may be presented in a way that displeases you. This doesn't make those opinions "inherently offensive," nor does it magically turn those opinions into presumptions of "objective truth."


To sum up: you dismiss an explicit insult posted repeatedly by Collins' fans, you object to purported insults posted outside of DU by non-DU-members, and you attribute insults to people who didn't actually post those insults.

Interesting indeed.