And using the phrase 'ad hominem' probably counts as making people heads hurt...
========================================
"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument."
There are people who say that name-calling is not an ad hominem unless is it explicitly claims causal connection between one's character and one's argument, with words like "because" (eg "you're wrong BECAUSE you're an idiot"). Here is one such view:
But forum posts are not mathematical proofs, and nobody explicitly shows causal connection when it can be inferred from the context. When you read a disagreeing reply, it's reasonable to assume that what you are reading is a counter-argument (as opposed to, say, an attempt to make someone cry), and so everything in it should be treated as a premise of that counter-argument.
"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument."