I've been stalled out three fourths of the way through a certain anarchist theory book for weeks because while I don't strongly disagree with anything, and it offers good correctives, it's too fucking timid to be worth a damn. No one will ever *use* this book, much less cite it.
Nerds unironically took the historically very successful motte and bailey strategy, extended it to rhetoric, and decided the main purpose of this extension should be to exclude the strategy from rhetoric as a fallacy.