I mentioned that people who call themselves Christians but then commit acts of violence, for flimsy reasons and without provocation, are not in fact practicing Christianity. Some fool cried "hehe I guss there is No True Scotsman then huh?!" while patting himself on the back fiercely.
If someone wrongfully accuses you of creating a no true Scotsman (NTS) fallacy when discussing hypocrisy among self-proclaimed Christians, here's how I'd reply: "I've always defined 'Christian' as someone who follows the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. Anyone who claims Christianity but materially fails to practice it is something else: a 'hypocrite'. In Jesus's time, there were hypocrites in the leadership of Pharisaic Judaism, and he tore them a new anus in a speech recorded at Matthew 23." Clearly defining the goalposts early on shifts the debate from "you moved the goalposts" to "is this person really practicing?".
This infantile fevered-ego shit is killing Slashdot much faster than a shitty Beta redesign ever could hope to do. It's just far less trendy to protest it.
The NTS fallacy usually has roots in disputes over definitions. Even Scientology recognizes the problems that misunderstood words cause. One can prevent the fallacy by agreeing upon definitions before proceeding, such as "Christian == one practicing Jesus's teachings". This is an anti-NTS step that any Slashdot user can help stop, unlike forced beta for which the only cure is leaving Slashdot in favor of Soylent News or Pipedot. Right now, one can turn off beta, but once Slashdot forces it, the only course of action will be to follow reasoning analogous to Jesus's advice to body integrity identity disorder sufferers in Mark 9:45: "If [Slashdot beta] causes you to stumble, cut it off."