4 ms·

This comment does a fine job of opining on the incompleteness of an article that the commenter has clearly not read in full. This is a great example of irony, I

by strgrd 10y ago

This comment does a fine job of opining on the incompleteness of an article that the commenter has clearly not read in full. This is a great example of irony, I think, because your point about the irony of a black man inventing a machine that increased the desire for slaves, is covered in the third paragraph from the bottom. And here you are, claiming the article as incomplete because it failed to consider the irony. But it did! You just skimmed it. It is in fact you who is incomplete. I think it is fair to describe this scenario as "a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result." RTFA before opining next time :-)

mikestew 10y ago
RTFA before opining next time You used up a lot of fancy words, and yet still didn't point out where in the article the question is answered. For all of your "RTFA", you seem unable to address this question any better than the article did. Perhaps you are confused and read an article different from the one I did? If you click on the title at the top, it'll take you right to it. Despite that, my complaint was not with the article but with folks that would believe such a thing without giving even the most minute bit of thought. Since the article's author seemed unable to answer the question, I thought I'd take a whack at it, and failed because to me the impedance mismatch seemed obvious for the reason I stated.
- strgrd 10y ago
  This comment does a fine job of opining on the incompleteness of a comment that the commenter has clearly not read in full. This is a great example of irony, I think, because your point about not pointing out where in the article the question was answered, was covered in the same sentence as this sentence in the previous comment. And here you are, claiming the comment as incomplete because it failed to point out the location of where the question was answered. But it did! You just skimmed it. It is in fact you who is incomplete. I think it is fair to describe this scenario as "a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result." RTFC before opining next time :-)

by strgrd 10y ago

mikestew 10y ago

RTFA before opining next time You used up a lot of fancy words, and yet still didn't point out where in the article the question is answered. For all of your "RTFA", you seem unable to address this question any better than the article did. Perhaps you are confused and read an article different from the one I did? If you click on the title at the top, it'll take you right to it. Despite that, my complaint was not with the article but with folks that would believe such a thing without giving even the most minute bit of thought. Since the article's author seemed unable to answer the question, I thought I'd take a whack at it, and failed because to me the impedance mismatch seemed obvious for the reason I stated.

strgrd 10y ago
This comment does a fine job of opining on the incompleteness of a comment that the commenter has clearly not read in full. This is a great example of irony, I think, because your point about not pointing out where in the article the question was answered, was covered in the same sentence as this sentence in the previous comment. And here you are, claiming the comment as incomplete because it failed to point out the location of where the question was answered. But it did! You just skimmed it. It is in fact you who is incomplete. I think it is fair to describe this scenario as "a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result." RTFC before opining next time :-)