Talk:Post disputation argument

Notability / OR
No relevant results in Google Books for searches such as "post disputation" argument or "post disputation" fallacy. No reliable sources found in regular Google search either, nearly all results are Wikipedia mirrors. The only non-minor edits by the article's creator are to this article.

The article is not clear on what the fallacious argument is.


 * Is it more than just dishonesty?
 * Is it an argument regarding credibility? ("Party 2 was wrong on A; therefore they are probably wrong on B.")
 * Is it reversing the initial positions? ("I wasn't wrong; A held that position.")
 * Is it implying that to be correct about B one must be correct about A?
 * What is B'? How is it different than B? What is the relevance of B?
 * Does Party 2 explicitly state that they were never incorrect, or do they simply drop the incorrect claim?

The example's focus on the arguers correctness and truth from a "reliable source" seems suspect. —Mrwojo (talk) 01:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)