nerds are googling the definition of ad hominem to prove that my tweet is wronghttps://twitter.com/treylw89/status/980096023451373570 …
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Ad hominems are valid wherever ethics are valid. So, very valid in politics, but not in, say, purely epistemic arguments.
I would say wherever consistency is relevant. A nice eg (not obvs ethical) would be Zermelo pointing to the french analysts' use of axiom of choice(+equivalents) in their work while arguing against it theoretically
Would accusing them of inconsistency constitute an ad hominem attack though? I thought the fallacy was in extrapolating flaws of a person's character to their arguments. In a purely logical context, the words should not depend on the speaker.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.