4 ms·
> you're just seeming to want them to spell it out completely Yes because that’s what “clear disclaimer” means, which was the ask. I’m really baffled that this
by SamoyedFurFluff 6y ago
> you're just seeming to want them to spell it out completely
Yes because that’s what “clear disclaimer” means, which was the ask. I’m really baffled that this line of logic, because the post I was responding to said “clear disclaimer”, when I’m pointing to something that requires second-order interpretation and therefore by definition can’t be a clear disclaimer. (I mean you yourself said that it’s understood by extrapolation. Requiring extrapolation =! clear disclaimer imo. I would in fact expect a clear disclaimer to require no extrapolation, and be so dumbly explained that anyone who can read at at teen level can understand it.)
- loceng 6y agoYou're changing the goal posts of your argument now. You claimed the statement was a lie, it wasn't - that is all I argued.
- SamoyedFurFluff 6y agoOh, okay, I’ve edited my post to say that “this is not a clear disclaimer”.
- refulgentis 6y agoPlease try to avoid dragging interlocutors through long threads, knowing they'll be downvoted at each step - it was extremely clear from step 1 what they meant, you didn't need it clarified over several comments to reach this conclusion.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]