6 ms·

Is this uncivil? I can see why its unsubstantive (Although my parent wasnt exactly substantive either). Whether or not its against the rules - do you understand

Is this uncivil? I can see why its unsubstantive (Although my parent wasnt exactly substantive either). Whether or not its against the rules - do you understand my point?

dang 9y ago
Yes, "you're being $pejorative" is uncivil. The parent was also a bad comment that deserved to be flagged, but since you took a step further in the wrong direction, yours was the one I chided.
- pvg 9y ago
  Hah, ur fase is a bad comment that deserves to be flagged! The original comment suggested part of the analysis by a reporter and lawyer who is closely following the case got something wrong because hey, they can apparently outline 8 technical trade secrets in 45 seconds by knowingly typing gibberish. The poster wondered whether they are fooling themselves in doing that. By their own words, we can answer that in affirmative as well as recognize they have not, in fact, outlined 8 trade secrets in 45 seconds.
- hateduser2 9y ago
  It doesn’t matter, but for the record I don’t think you’re right to assert this is uncivil. I didn’t write it pejoratively, I thought he was focusing on an extraneous detail and missing the bigger picture, which is (imo) the meaning of obtuse. I think if you’re in battle mode then you’d be inclined to take it as an insult, but I don’t think it must be one (and I don’t think it’s wise to write as though everyone’s in battle mode - to cater to that)
  - dang 9y ago
    I believe you that you didn't intend it pejoratively, but if you post a comment that takes that form and don't provide information that clearly signals your intent, plenty of people are going to take it that way. That's not a question of stylistic taste, it's an empirical observation about how internet forums work. Even if 90% of readers guess your intent correctly—an unlikely number—that leaves hundreds if not thousands who read it the other way. It doesn't take much to provoke some of them into replying in kind, and that's the downward spiral we're trying to avoid here.

Is this uncivil? I can see why its unsubstantive (Although my parent wasnt exactly substantive either). Whether or not its against the rules - do you understand my point?

dang 9y ago

Yes, "you're being $pejorative" is uncivil. The parent was also a bad comment that deserved to be flagged, but since you took a step further in the wrong direction, yours was the one I chided.

pvg 9y ago
Hah, ur fase is a bad comment that deserves to be flagged! The original comment suggested part of the analysis by a reporter and lawyer who is closely following the case got something wrong because hey, they can apparently outline 8 technical trade secrets in 45 seconds by knowingly typing gibberish. The poster wondered whether they are fooling themselves in doing that. By their own words, we can answer that in affirmative as well as recognize they have not, in fact, outlined 8 trade secrets in 45 seconds.
hateduser2 9y ago
It doesn’t matter, but for the record I don’t think you’re right to assert this is uncivil. I didn’t write it pejoratively, I thought he was focusing on an extraneous detail and missing the bigger picture, which is (imo) the meaning of obtuse. I think if you’re in battle mode then you’d be inclined to take it as an insult, but I don’t think it must be one (and I don’t think it’s wise to write as though everyone’s in battle mode - to cater to that)
- dang 9y ago
  I believe you that you didn't intend it pejoratively, but if you post a comment that takes that form and don't provide information that clearly signals your intent, plenty of people are going to take it that way. That's not a question of stylistic taste, it's an empirical observation about how internet forums work. Even if 90% of readers guess your intent correctly—an unlikely number—that leaves hundreds if not thousands who read it the other way. It doesn't take much to provoke some of them into replying in kind, and that's the downward spiral we're trying to avoid here.