Originally Posted by loonyphoenix
I think the implication is rather obvious.
False dichotomy. You are assuming that any fork that isn't clearly a good move therefore is clearly a bad move. You ignore the third possibility: we just can't tell at this point and with the information available whether the fork was good or bad. That is how I read that paragraph, and in fact it took me a few moments to figure out why people were talking about "bad forks" since it didn't occur to me to read it that way.