3 ms·
The offer is coming from the director, so he _is_ offering. 'Misleading' makes it sound like the title is a lie, which it isn't. You just misunderstood. Also,
by mosselman 6y ago
The offer is coming from the director, so he _is_ offering. 'Misleading' makes it sound like the title is a lie, which it isn't. You just misunderstood.
Also, the offer coming from 120 people is a lot more powerful than just 1 person. It signals that many people find this an unjust ruling, rather than just 1 person, and are willing to go all the way to Nigeria for it and spend a month in what is probably hell on earth, especially for westerners.
- RobLach 6y agoWell... they misunderstood because it's misleading. The burden of clarity is not on the reader.
- mosselman 6y agoI have a solution for this. Just put the whole article in the title. Then the title can only be unclear when the article is unclear.
- lucb1e 6y agoAs I understood GP's comment, these 120 people are offering to each take 1/120th of the jail time. As I understand your rebuttal, 120 people individually offered to take 1/2 of the jail time. I haven't read the article but you're arguing over the title and you seem to be assuming a different situation. Depending on which situation is true, the title is misleading or not. This info isn't in the title so you can't "simply misunderstood" that. The title definitely suggests 1 person offering to take 1/2 the jail time, and while that is congruous with 119 others offering the same (to take 1/2 the time), it would not be the same as offering to take 1/Nth. Then it would be misleading. If it's not misleading, then GP misunderstood the article or the article is unclear (not the title).