Ad Hominem

 Used to identify a comment that ChenZhen considers to be nothing more than a personal attack, insult, or other ad hominem argument.   In a discussion or debate, Chamber protocols consider this to be a concession of defeat (hence, the white flag), and an indication that the debater has nothing left to offer to the discussion.  From wikipedia:

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument to the man”, “argument against the man”) consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject.

It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument’s proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument.

Other common subtypes of the ad hominem include the ad hominem circumstantial, or ad hominem circumstantiae, an attack which is directed at the circumstances or situation of the arguer; and the ad hominem tu quoque, which objects to an argument by characterizing the arguer as acting or arguing in accordance with the view that he is arguing against.

Thoughtful, respectful, witty and well-sourced responses are encouraged here in the Chamber.  This by no means implies that this blog is a forum where only “kid gloves” are allowed.  Remember, it is always possible to attack the argument instead of the person, and to put the opponent on the proverbial ropes without resorting to such tactics is considered to be the goal in honorable debate. 

As another Chamber protocol, comments that earn this badge will not be responded to by ChenZhen, and others are encouraged to ignore them as well.