When an argument is rebutted by saying it is both a 'red herring' and a 'straw man.' (Usually done at different times.) As the two fallacies are incongruent, this term itself will eventually be incorporated into informal logic as a fallacy.
My opponent's counter argument is a straw herring. First he claims my example is an irrelevant distraction from the topic, (red herring)then goes on to assert I created it using his words out of context so I could attack this erroneous extrapolation of his words and then declare victory. (straw man)
A personal message(pm)support network of like minded users-cliqsters-at an online site or forum.
Creationists often came to the science sub-forums at RDF to try and derail the dialectic. When a cliqster finds one posting their sermons, he sends a 'batch' pm to all the others. It includes a link to 'click,' which takes them right to the current point of discussion on the flagged thread. They thereby maximize the visibility of their consensus viewpoint by presenting it on many different debates they might have missed without being part of the cliq.
An argument unto itself that arose to refute the ontological 'proof' for the existence of a guiding intelligence that created the universe with a 'purpose' behind the many observable processes.
According to this theory, on-tology is invalid un-til a process is discovered that requires an omnipotent intelligence at the core of it's genesis. Until then, such conjectures will be categorized onto the class of unsubstantiated presuppostions.
It is possible that atheists will find themselves in an untological cul-de-sac if they continue to reject any form of purpose or objective in the process of evolution. It may not be sound science, but it would be pragmatic politically.
Someone who participates in an online cliq to help advance certain viewpoints shared by the others in the group.
By sending links to discussions of common interest in batch personal messages at various forums, cliqsters insure their ideas are well represented in the various debates relevant to their collective interests.
OMG! Jason was just suspended for a week for calling JJ a racist, which he admits he in fact is!! Act NOW on behalf of our fellow cliqster. Send a pm to all the moderators protesting this unjust action taken against one of the forums most constructive posters.
When a moderator on a discussion forum splits off a batch of replies to another thread for purposes primarily related to censoring viewpoints they disagree with by removing them from the larger, ongoing debate and marginalizing their impact.
While the site was owned by well known skeptic educational foundation, staff were apparently instructed to use a 'divide and conquer' strategy in dealing with any dissent. Arguments critical of policy were often split to new threads for being 'off topic,' thus diluting both their continuity and traction. It was a subtle form of censorship one wag dubbed as the 'censorsplit strategy.'
A 'sock-puppet' on a message board that is not very active and remains low profile over many months. At a key moment on a debate, this 'mole' can be deployed to support the puppet master's argument without arousing any suspicion. They have a history that doesn't support any.
When Sidhe returned to the dirtybutrational.org website and was suddenly supported by other members, none of his detractors suspected any were a 'mole puppet.' He had established several way back, and used them sparingly to reply on various threads.