4 ms·
The OP literally made the argument that, in the extreme, people must have to die if regulations are relaxed. OP did not assume good faith. OP pushed the argumen
by virmundi 8y ago
The OP literally made the argument that, in the extreme, people must have to die if regulations are relaxed. OP did not assume good faith. OP pushed the argument to the extreme. I responded by pointing out that out. I appreciate civility, but won’t assume good faith when the other participant has shown bad faith.
- yesenadam 8y ago"Ah..I wondered when that would show up." was just being condescending and snarky. "But they started it!" is not a defence.
- virmundi 8y agoNope. I’ve just been here for a while. If you take the conversations on HN and put the them through a Bayesian Network, you can tell as soon as “deregulation” appears, the conversation will take a turn for “people will die” worse.
- yesenadam 8y ago"Nope."? You're missing my point. I'm not saying you're not right about that, but that being so condescending and snarky is unacceptable on here, whether you're right or not, and however the person you're replying to spoke to you.
- virmundi 8y agoThen ban me for using colloquialisms. I'd frankly love it. Flag the comment, "He said something in a way I don't agree with. Also, if you checkout his comment history, he fails to use the Oxford Comma. That has to be worth something!" Also, you don't need to include the period when you're quoting me. "Nope"? is valid too.