I have to call bollocks on this "...anyone who puts "Micro$haft Windoze" has lost the argument anyway...".
Calling something a silly name is irrelevant to the argument and calling attention to that as a counter-argument is silly. At the least it makes you sound protective about the product being discussed and at worst it looks like your own argument is so weak you have to call attention to the silly name as you have nothing else.
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Sat 21 May 2011, 22:35, 2 replies)

Using such a phrase
points to having a weak opinion, and you have to resort to name flames to bolster one's argument.

Also see Fib Dems and NuLieBoor with Tony B. Liar.
( sandettie light vessel automatic New Twitter - @bollocksreally, Sat 21 May 2011, 23:48, closed)

Using such a phrase points to being pissed off.
Personally I prefer not to use the correct spelling the names of people or things I think are beneath contempt -- if you can't see beyond someone letting out a little frustration then, in my opinion, your argument is not likely to be particularly thoughtful either.
The logic of the argument is what matters -- not some judgement based upon someone having a pet name for something.
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Sun 22 May 2011, 13:06, closed)

I have to call stylistic bollocks on this.
Adding the "and at worst" clause here utterly obliterates the rhetorical power of the point you're making (and I think you mean "best" where you have "least").

:)
( Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Sun 22 May 2011, 13:45, closed)

You have me there.
Damn you!
(Me, I'm not... in any way intoxicated, Sun 22 May 2011, 16:25, closed)