3 ms·
> This is a partially satirical talk. It is intended to be mostly factually accurate, however some of the details are stretched for comedic effect. I'd think t
by xena 5y ago
> This is a partially satirical talk. It is intended to be mostly factually accurate, however some of the details are stretched for comedic effect.
I'd think this would cover all the bases. But what do I know, I just wrote the talk.
- shawn-butler 5y agoYou wrote it badly. I would have walked out.
- notacoward 5y agoHey, I'm supposed to be the Bad Guy here, and even I think that was uncalled for.
- shawn-butler 5y agoJust giving clear non-satirical and honest feedback. The basic facts/history are incorrect. Not to mention the not-so implicit disrespect to the contributors (Sun, lolz! C modules oh-no omgz). If I was watching this in a 30-second tiktok maybe I would have thought it was funny, or maybe the audience for the talk was expecting such low-grade content? Can't say I wasn't there.
- dogecoinbase 5y agoPlay Devil's Advocate, and devils sometimes show up to be advocated for.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- notacoward 5y agoYes, you did, and it was a good talk. I actually did enjoy the snarky tone. PAM is a mess. On the other hand, I don't think that disclaimer really does cover all the bases. You yourself say it's partially satirical, implying that other parts are sincerely meant. Why shouldn't those be subject to the same discussion, correction, or even criticism as any other sincerely meant opinion in any other thing linked here? I'm pretty sure you can handle that back-and-forth better than Sir Lexicality gives you credit for. And if anyone's still offended: my comments are partially satirical too. There, I'm immunized.
- butwhywhyoh 5y agoThis is the perfect cover to do whatever you want at all times. I made an incorrect statement? Don't worry, I _meant_ to get that part wrong. This part here that was insightful and you enjoyed? I meant that part 100%.