The relevant principle of epistemic good conduct seems to me straightforward: if you’ve got to make personal attacks (and sometimes you do), make them after presenting your object-level points that support those personal attacks. This shouldn’t be a difficult rule to follow, or follow much better than this; and violating it this hugely and explicitly is sufficiently bad news that people should’ve been wary about this post and hesitated to upvote it for that reason alone.
This might well be a reasonable norm to follow, and it might well even be the type of norm that enlightened rational actors can converge on as good, but I think it’s far from settled practice, and I don’t think Omnizoid is defecting on established norms at least in this instance (in the way that e.g., doxxing or faking data is widely considered defecting in most internet discussions).
This might well be a reasonable norm to follow, and it might well even be the type of norm that enlightened rational actors can converge on as good, but I think it’s far from settled practice, and I don’t think Omnizoid is defecting on established norms at least in this instance (in the way that e.g., doxxing or faking data is widely considered defecting in most internet discussions).