4 ms·

Obviously the question is ambiguous enough that there is more than one interpretation. Even if they said "What specific & exact ad service would you recommend"

Obviously the question is ambiguous enough that there is more than one interpretation. Even if they said "What specific & exact ad service would you recommend", a reply of "Any ad service that doesn't do tracking -- consider contextual based ads" is still a valid one, no?

cxr 6y ago
No. > Even if they said [...] We don't have to imagine anything. We can look at what was written (and I quoted it again above). No matter what a person has in mind when writing out, "Don't put ads that breach user privacy", it's not a meaningful reply to the question that was actually asked.
- ziddoap 6y ago
  Interesting... You started with "OP seems [...]", which sort of implies you are interpreting as well... Whatever, I'll stand corrected I guess. My (and everyone else except you!) reply is not meaningful. Edit to add: If I ask for a product that does X and respects Y, and someone says "Here are the criteria I use to make sure any product respects your Y requirement", I would accept that as a valid and helpful reply. Maybe it's just me.
  - cxr 6y ago
    > You started with "OP seems [...]", which sort of implies you are interpreting as well... I edited that in to soften the message. It's like the approach of phrasing things to avoid use of "you" when addressing a topic, to prevent people from getting defensive—which I also do a lot and did here. Clearly that effort was wasted.
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      You're really convinced about being right, but I don't think the question is nearly that clear. Maybe if they said "what ad service would be acceptable". But they asked what ads would be acceptable, which makes it sound like a description of acceptable ads is a valid response. It's not like they wanted a list of individual ads!
      - cxr 6y ago
        > You're really convinced about being right If you're going to resort to personal attacks, I have some thoughts of my own.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        That wasn't supposed to be any more of an attack than "I edited [seems] in to soften the message." is an attack.
        cxr 6y ago
        It's straight up ad hominem[1]. Not only is "I edited that in[...]", nowhere close to being a personal attack, it's a direct response to what the other commenter wrote: > You started with "OP seems [...]" 1. And I'm not talking about intent here (in the case of either remark—mine or yours). "You're really convinced about being right" is undeniably ad hominem.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        Me saying that you're confident, but that I am less confident, is not ad hominem. Generally I would classify neither of our posts as attacks. I'm not sure why you're reacting so strongly to mine.
        cxr 6y ago
        Making remarks about a person rather than the subject is outright ad hominem (once again, regardless of intent). There is no context where it isn't. I was wrong before about it being "undeniable"; it can be denied. But if you do deny it, then you're wrong.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        But it wasn't an attack. When I call your certainty misplaced it's the exact equivalent of how you just said "you're wrong". It's a bad idea to call other people wrong if you're going to react so strongly to being called wrong yourself.

cxr 6y ago

No. > Even if they said [...] We don't have to imagine anything. We can look at what was written (and I quoted it again above). No matter what a person has in mind when writing out, "Don't put ads that breach user privacy", it's not a meaningful reply to the question that was actually asked.

ziddoap 6y ago
Interesting... You started with "OP seems [...]", which sort of implies you are interpreting as well... Whatever, I'll stand corrected I guess. My (and everyone else except you!) reply is not meaningful. Edit to add: If I ask for a product that does X and respects Y, and someone says "Here are the criteria I use to make sure any product respects your Y requirement", I would accept that as a valid and helpful reply. Maybe it's just me.
- cxr 6y ago
  > You started with "OP seems [...]", which sort of implies you are interpreting as well... I edited that in to soften the message. It's like the approach of phrasing things to avoid use of "you" when addressing a topic, to prevent people from getting defensive—which I also do a lot and did here. Clearly that effort was wasted.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    You're really convinced about being right, but I don't think the question is nearly that clear. Maybe if they said "what ad service would be acceptable". But they asked what ads would be acceptable, which makes it sound like a description of acceptable ads is a valid response. It's not like they wanted a list of individual ads!
    - cxr 6y ago
      > You're really convinced about being right If you're going to resort to personal attacks, I have some thoughts of my own.
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        That wasn't supposed to be any more of an attack than "I edited [seems] in to soften the message." is an attack.
        cxr 6y ago
        It's straight up ad hominem[1]. Not only is "I edited that in[...]", nowhere close to being a personal attack, it's a direct response to what the other commenter wrote: > You started with "OP seems [...]" 1. And I'm not talking about intent here (in the case of either remark—mine or yours). "You're really convinced about being right" is undeniably ad hominem.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        Me saying that you're confident, but that I am less confident, is not ad hominem. Generally I would classify neither of our posts as attacks. I'm not sure why you're reacting so strongly to mine.
        cxr 6y ago
        Making remarks about a person rather than the subject is outright ad hominem (once again, regardless of intent). There is no context where it isn't. I was wrong before about it being "undeniable"; it can be denied. But if you do deny it, then you're wrong.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        But it wasn't an attack. When I call your certainty misplaced it's the exact equivalent of how you just said "you're wrong". It's a bad idea to call other people wrong if you're going to react so strongly to being called wrong yourself.