Lemmy sucks.
Guilt by association is widely accepted as an ad hominem fallacy
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/logicalfallacies/Ad-Hominem-Guilt-by-Association
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Guilt_by_association
It still is. You can commit to the ad hominem (guilt by association) fallacy by saying that the arguments are bad because extremists believe them or point out logical fallacies in the arguments and say that they must be false because they’re logically invalid.
Focusing on one or the other should suffice for an argument though. Although you can’t do both because the latter is an ad hominem fallacy
Why do you want to debate your husband about Rogan’s talking points if you yourself are having trouble arguing with them?
Tox doesn’t collect any data at all, as far as I know. It’s purely P2P.
I go to news sites and add “/feed” or “/rss” to the URL.
That’s a good question. My instinct would be to say that they’re worried about importing radicalized Palestinians, but I don’t know that the ideology of those radicals would be too different than the people living in Egypt, at least not different enough that it would spark violence.