Generalization literally means to apply the point to all involved. So no, it's quite appropriate for mgechev so reject generalization if the point doesn't apply to them. And that in no way a rejection of the facts presented. The same way that the generalization "apples are red" can be rejected by the presence of green apples without denying the existence of the red apples.
> Mgechev is telling us not to draw a conclusion from Jeff’s piece.
You're really going to pull out a dictionary on me, then blatantly ignore the emphasized word in your chosen definition that is exactly the word that makes my statement true?
Not sure why you're linking me your own posts, which I have read. You're determined to assert things that nobody but you said, which I guess is fine, but I don't think this conversation is constructive or useful. I would suggest you take a hard look at your behavior, though. But that's up to you.
