4 ms·

What stood out to me about this article, which I saw several days ago, is how it names but then basically says nothing about his partner, nor a single quote. T

by vba616 5y ago

What stood out to me about this article, which I saw several days ago, is how it names but then basically says nothing about his partner, nor a single quote. They live on board with him and "played a key role", that seems to be it. If you read it quickly, you might not even notice that it wasn't a single guy + some volunteers. The one instance of the word "couple" is referring to different people restoring another ship.

herendin 5y ago
There's a photo of them in the gallery. It's likely the reporter didn't have time to talk to her, or she was unavailable or unwilling. You're probably overestimating the time and effort dedicated to writing this article. It appears to be mostly or entirely sourced from one short interview with Wilson and photos from him
- vba616 5y ago
  You sound like you're defending the reporter, but I wasn't accusing them as we just don't know. It's still odd, so I couldn't help being curious whether Willson, his partner, or the reporter is responsible.
  - herendin 5y ago
    No, I'm suggesting you're seeing intention where it possibly doesn't exist Am I defending the reporter? Or complaining that they did a bad job by leaving that obvious question of the partner unanswered? Neither, I hope.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - vba616 5y ago
      I can't be seeing intention without identifying a person who is responsible. That's nonsensical.
      - herendin 5y ago
        Well here's your own comment, which is clearly seeking possible intention, and identifies individuals who may be responsible: >I couldn't help being curious whether Willson, his partner, or the reporter is responsible. I just say that this phenomenon you noticed may be accidental, and there may be no intention by any of the individuals you named in that statement, or by any other party. Sorry, but I can't explain this situation to you any more simply than that.
        vba616 5y ago
        I agree there may be no intention to produce the article as it came out. I was not using the word "responsible" to mean "caused the end result intentionally". If I run over a squirrel with my car, it's not intentional, but I'm responsible. If the other person in the car slapped me and distracted me, we might both be partly responsible. Maybe the editor cut something out they shouldn't have (are there still editors?). Or maybe a divorce is brewing due to the ship obsession.

by vba616 5y ago

herendin 5y ago

There's a photo of them in the gallery. It's likely the reporter didn't have time to talk to her, or she was unavailable or unwilling. You're probably overestimating the time and effort dedicated to writing this article. It appears to be mostly or entirely sourced from one short interview with Wilson and photos from him

vba616 5y ago
You sound like you're defending the reporter, but I wasn't accusing them as we just don't know. It's still odd, so I couldn't help being curious whether Willson, his partner, or the reporter is responsible.
- herendin 5y ago
  No, I'm suggesting you're seeing intention where it possibly doesn't exist Am I defending the reporter? Or complaining that they did a bad job by leaving that obvious question of the partner unanswered? Neither, I hope.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - vba616 5y ago
    I can't be seeing intention without identifying a person who is responsible. That's nonsensical.
    - herendin 5y ago
      Well here's your own comment, which is clearly seeking possible intention, and identifies individuals who may be responsible: >I couldn't help being curious whether Willson, his partner, or the reporter is responsible. I just say that this phenomenon you noticed may be accidental, and there may be no intention by any of the individuals you named in that statement, or by any other party. Sorry, but I can't explain this situation to you any more simply than that.
      - vba616 5y ago
        I agree there may be no intention to produce the article as it came out. I was not using the word "responsible" to mean "caused the end result intentionally". If I run over a squirrel with my car, it's not intentional, but I'm responsible. If the other person in the car slapped me and distracted me, we might both be partly responsible. Maybe the editor cut something out they shouldn't have (are there still editors?). Or maybe a divorce is brewing due to the ship obsession.