You’re assuming I agree that all ad hominem arguments are bad. You cannot separate a person, where their beliefs have no sway over their arguments and they are perfectly logical. That’s like physics 101, imagine a perfect sphere kind of thing. I cannot take an argument in good faith when the person is presenting it in bad faith - even if I agree with it (which I sort of do, I think DEI stuff is mostly worthless, I just don’t think it’s why Boeing sucks).
The accusation of "bad faith" is either unsubstantiated or irrelevant or both. It's basically saying "I don't like your arguments, therefore I'm allowed to dismiss them by declaring them to be 'bad faith' arguments."
That neither shows that the "bad faith" accusation is justified nor that the arguments in question are wrong. It's not a counterargument. It's just a mixture of ad hominem and mere contradiction.
To reiterate: "There is a clear reason why DEI hiring is bad: It comes at the cost of merit based hiring." That's the argument. The "bad faith" stuff is irrelevant.
Yes I have. He is clearly against DEI and his entire post was about how DEI is bad and why things are bad. He is ignoring any of the other myriad things that could also be the causes of why Boeing sucks, even though he must be aware of them.
Yes, he is against DEI because he thinks there is evidence DEI is bad. That has nothing to do with bad faith.
And other people here in other threads are also ignoring alternative theories about what went wrong at Boeing, including the DEI theory. Yet you aren't holding that against them, aren't you?
