http://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
Part of the reason I have written at such length is that the quality of the arguments for the other position are so very, very poor. And oft repeated.
Part of the reason I have written at such length is that the quality of the arguments for the other position are so very, very poor. And oft repeated.
Suppose I have good reason to believe you are unreliable in your testimony. If so, it's perfectly reasonable for me to assign low credence to your claims.
The other guy was basically suggesting we have a good reason to believe you are unreliable, as they were suggesting the effort you've gone to is indicative of a motivation that would make you biased, and therefore unreliable.
The correct response is not to engage in claims of fallacies, but to provide further reasons to believe your claims the audience can accept, or suggest you have other motivations. You've gone for the latter option here, but I have to say your option is not as it stands very persuasive.
This is not to say your claims are false. But it is to say that more work is needed to make then suasive.
He made comments based on what you said, not assumptions about your character. If you love college and want everyone to go, then I guess he is wrong.