This tactic has a couple of likely effects. First, it implies that you can’t be bothered to even deign to discuss an issue with someone who is so inferior that they can’t even spell correctly. Secondly, there’s a good chance you’ll get to argue about spelling and/or grammar instead of whatever the real topic of discussion is. There’s lots of topic-hijacking maneuvers, but this one in particular seems especially popular.

Why this argument is stupid: the mere fact that your opponent has emotions has no necessary connection to the validity of his arguments.

I even see that in major newspaper letter sections where the writer says “a left/right wing hack publication like yours will never publish my letter b/c you don’t care about dissenting opinions!”

And then they get published, which is part of the plan all along >.>;;

It doesn’t come up on blogs, but on forums where comments can be rated by users, “I know this is an unpopular opinion, but…” has the particularly obnoxious variant “I know I’m going to get downmodded for this, but…”, with the requisite whinging about how oppressed people expressing this opinion are on said forum.

It guarantees an insta-downmod from me.

This is a great post

I think you summed everything up very nicely here

I think another example for the “if you don’t like it, make your own” argument is if you’re the victim of say, police brutality, and when you complain, you’re told “well if you don’t like it, why don’t you become an officer?”

It doesn’t help, and honestly why should the onus be on the victim to do the other person’s job? That argument taken to it’s logical conclusion would say that nobody is responsible for anything, and nobody can complain or expect other ppl to be helped to any sorts of standards. And if you dun have certain skills, then you’re just screwed XD