有人搞人身攻击，那我用人身攻击回复一下：
英文DND社区比中文大而且更开放（意味着更难偶然产生一个错误的观点结果大家都支持），说谁跑的团多谁读的扩展多，果园或者其他中文社区在这些方面是没有优势的。
基于以上理由，洋大人说的是真理的可能性更高，除非有明确证据可以驳斥之。
比如天朝某一流高校出了个结论和伯克利某诺奖得主的结论刚好相反，当然大家默认是天朝高校更可能有问题，总体上来看也确实是天朝高校错的更多，如果说这么多分歧全是老外脑残，不管你信不信，反正我是不信。
In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a
fallacious argument that concludes a proposition is true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so."
所以你恰恰是乐队花车谬误的绝佳例子。
当然啦，指望你懂逻辑学看来不太现实。
你看这几个例子，
This fallacy is sometimes committed while trying to convince a person that a widely popular thought is true.
Nine out of ten of my constituents oppose the bill, therefore it is a bad idea.
Fifty million Elvis fans can't be wrong.
Everyone's doing it.
In a court of law, the jury vote by majority; therefore they will always make the correct decision.
Many people buy extended warranties, therefore it is wise to buy them.
Millions of people agree with my viewpoint, therefore it must be true.
The majority of this country voted for this President, therefore this president can't be wrong
My family or tribe holds this as a truth, and everyone who disagrees is simply wrong.
加一个“洋大人says法师is OP，so it is OP，you 果园众 are shabby”是不是形式完全相同的等效论证？
可惜以上论证没一个是对的。
用估计高中生也能听懂的话解释一下就是，不管洋大人说的对不对，“洋大人都这么说所以这就是对的”在形式上就是一个坏论证，而我们有理有据的论证不管是不是错的在形式上都是一个好论证，也就是说还不用检验整个论证流程，在逻辑学上你就已经输了。
至于真理是不是在多数人一边，我没学过心理学我不知道，但我知道有一种东西叫从众心理。
也就是说，正因为圈子小才可以更好地保存每个个体的判断力，而不是像你一样连实战测试都没做过就被卷入了法孙OP还得砍的狂潮。
