Mutual respect, prejudice, safety, and personal responsibility

[sarkeizen]

Please explain to me the difference then.

You are being so pretentious
You are being such a shill

This has been explained a few times.  Saying someone is "a shill" is, in English a PERSON who is promoting something because they are paid or as if they are paid. Hence it is virtually always about a person - the notable exception is when it is being used as a verb.  Which is not the case in your example or in most of the uses I've seen here.  So it is difficult to create a phrase where it is not an attack on a person.  Whereas "pretentious" isn't a person.  An advertisement can be pretentious an advertisement can not be a shill (An advertisement can be said "to shill" or perhaps it can be "shilling").  A PERSON can be a shill who manifests this by advertising something.  Similarly "playing dumb" isn't a person.  It's an action performed by a person.

Hence it's pretty obvious why someone would like to differentiate between some terms which are almost necessarily personal attacks and  terms which are not necessarily personal attacks.  Your desire not to see this is interesting.

[Jimboot]

This has been explained a few times.  Saying someone is "a shill" is, in English a PERSON who is promoting something because they are paid or as if they are paid. Hence it is virtually always about a person - the notable exception is when it is being used as a verb.  Which is not the case in your example or in most of the uses I've seen here.  So it is difficult to create a phrase where it is not an attack on a person.  Whereas "pretentious" isn't a person.  An advertisement can be pretentious an advertisement can not be a shill (An advertisement can be said "to shill" or perhaps it can be "shilling").  A PERSON can be a shill who manifests this by advertising something.  Similarly "playing dumb" isn't a person.  It's an action performed by a person.

Hence it's pretty obvious why someone would like to differentiate between some terms which are almost necessarily personal attacks and  terms which are not necessarily personal attacks.  Your desire not to see this is interesting.

Yeah I don't think English is your first language. No offence.

[Qwert]

Yeah I don't think English is your first language. No offence.

Believe it or not, most of those whose English is their first language, they can't express themselves WRITING in English (more or less, they are unable to do so and reasons of that are numerous).
My English IS NOT my first one and I am aware that I make errors in that (my original) one. And I can't help for that.

[sarkeizen]

Yeah I don't think English is your first language.

Actually it is.

Not only that but don't you think it's interesting that I can be pretty specific about what and where you are incorrect and you only seem able to ignore and make broad generalizations.

A personal attack, is pretty universally meant to be an attack on the person not as a description of something they are doing or saying.

[Jimboot]

Actually it is.

Not only that but don't you think it's interesting that I can be pretty specific about what and where you are incorrect and you only seem able to ignore and make broad generalizations.

A personal attack, is pretty universally meant to be an attack on the person not as a description of something they are doing or saying.

Well you're deliberately ignoring context then and no I don't find it interesting. My original argument was simple. Treat people how you want to be treated, especially in a thread where you're asking people to be nice probably a good idea to call people names. pretty simple age old concept.