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

[Straw Man]

114. Oh, puh-leeze ...

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...

Despite your desperate attempts to make this all personal, no thanks -- I don't wish to play that way. I'm merely discussing why people get so exercised about this.

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?

Fair enough, but who said I tolerate it? Now who's "making stuff up"?

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.

Wrong. "This sucks" posits a quality (or lack thereof) inherent in the object itself. If you don't understand the difference between that and "I don't like this," then you don't understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity.

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.

It's a statement of fact about you -- not about the music. See how that works?

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.

Actually, you've got it exactly backwards. You have just made a proposition that can be tested and either verified or disproved. That would make it objectively true or false: nothing subjective about it, once we perform the experiment. On the other hand "this music sucks" cannot be objectively confirmed or denied: it is opinion masquerading as fact.

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."

Again, you fail to understand the difference between subjectivity and objectivity. I don't particularly care how you present your opinions, as long as you don't present them as objective facts. If the music does indeed objectively "suck," then people who like it must be guilty of error. That's what objectivity is.

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.

Nope. Never dismissed any insult. Made a reference to something outside of DU because we are discussing a particular Internet phenomenon that exists within DU as well as outside it. Didn't attribute insults to anyone -- merely pointed out the error of assuming that one's subjective opinions deserve recognition as objective facts.

Any other irrelevant accusations or misattributions you'd care to make?