3 ms·
>while fivea/pshc's words might accidentally encourage that confusion, they were not confused, and were not conflating the two. Probably more semantics. I don'
by unclebucknasty 5y ago
>while fivea/pshc's words might accidentally encourage that confusion, they were not confused, and were not conflating the two.
Probably more semantics. I don't claim to know what's in fivea/pshc's heads or whether they themselves are confused. I was speaking to my observation that their comments merged the two issues.
You may prefer phrasing like, "their words might accidentally encourage confusion" versus "conflation". I'd say conflation is the mechanism there, but OK.
Or you might prefer I specifically clarify "their comments conflated the two" vs "they conflated the two".
OK.
- Dylan16807 5y agoHere's how I see the difference: They made a definite distinction between the two, but if someone read too fast they might miss the distinction. So their comments did not conflate, but might accidentally cause future conflation, so it's reasonable to reply to make the difference extra clear, but I don't think it's reasonable to accuse them of conflation.
- unclebucknasty 5y agoThen it's not merely semantics. We legitimately disagree. It happens. Thanks for clarifying.