Appeal: ad hominem

From Plagues, Popes & Pandemonium! OPEN DEBATE! Geopolitics, Conspiracy, Theology, Film! 2026-10-05 17:50.

• #221715:42upheld Jay Dyer psogos: ad hominem (+1) tempered from flagrant to minor
  The council upheld the call, but nothing on this stream goes on anyone’s record.
  “You need some male vitality That's your main problem. It's not philosophy and academics. Up your testosterone, dude. That's the problem. These soy philosophy, man, dude, I can hear the lisp.”
  Diogenes: Ancient Dolphin had just announced a question on the problem of evil; Jay answered none of it and instead offered remarks about the caller's testosterone and voice as the reason to set the question aside, which the question does not rest on and nothing in the debate supports, and the call ended there.

  minor: Blatant and repeated: the second consecutive caller dismissed by a personal remark in place of engagement, made before the point was even put.

  Herodotus (yes): I couldn't find any earlier exchange between Jay Dyer and Ancient Dolphin. The site has no record for Ancient Dolphin, and web searches turned up nothing. The video page itself gave no transcript, so I couldn't read it. The only history comes from the transcript in front of us. Minutes earlier, Jay told the previous caller, Ariana, to "go find a husband" and said philosophy "is not for you". That is the same kind of dismissal of a person in place of an answer. The site's record on Jay shows ad hominem upheld 20 times and misrepresentation 21 times, so this fits an established pattern. Jay may have been joking, but the record supports the callout. Ancient Dolphin was a first-time caller, and nothing in the record shows provocation. Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egmU5n0kVM4 The bench graded it major (Aristotle, Plato); the referee had flagrant.

  • Aristotle uphold: On the record: Jay Dyer opened as host of an open forum taking calls on theology and philosophy and has held that role; he answered neither caller's philosophical point, and this line dismisses Ancient Dolphin's announced problem-of-evil question by remarking on testosterone and voice, consistent with his earlier dismissal of Ariana rather than a departure from it. All elements are present: remarks about the person substitute for any answer to the problem-of-evil question, they are irrelevant to it, nothing in the debate backs them, and the call ended there. Flagrant is too heavy since the remark was likely partly jocular, so major fits better.
  • Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "ad hominem". Ancient Dolphin had only said he wanted to improve his philosophy and had a question about the problem of evil. Jay never heard the question. He answered with a remark about the caller's testosterone and his lisp. That stands in for any answer and has nothing to do with the problem of evil. Nothing in the debate backs it, and it shuts the exchange down. It is also made in advance of the caller's point, so it poisons the well.
  • Plato uphold: On the record: Jay Dyer opened as host of an open forum, promising to take calls, and declared no thesis; he has held a pattern of dismissing callers personally rather than answering them, and this line fits that pattern rather than departing from it. Ancient Dolphin had only announced a question on the problem of evil. Jay gave no answer and attributed the caller's difficulties to testosterone and a lisp. The question does not rest on either, nothing in the record backs the remark, and it ended the exchange. Substitution, relevance and aim are all met. It is a first-time caller and the remark may be partly a joke, so flagrant is too high; major is better.

  The bench voted on this, and its verdict is kept as it was given. It does not vote on the calls of a call-in show now, and nothing there counts on anybody’s record.

  Judged on 2026-10-05 under rules 3fcdc91a53f9, since revisedAppeal this callout

Appeal this callout

Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.