4 ms·

That's a different union, what's your point? Unions aren't inherently negligent or parasitic. What's telling is I describe one bad one and you assume all are

That's a different union, what's your point? Unions aren't inherently negligent or parasitic. What's telling is I describe one bad one and you assume all are described that way, which is 'tiring' presumption that's exhausting to deal with that i hope will be reconsidered. It's like you criticize one negligent union, the woodwork comes out to protect the bad apple.

whoknowsidont 3y ago
You: Does the phrase "negligent union parasites" refer to one union or is it applicable to many different unions? ChatGPT: The phrase "negligent union parasites" is a derogatory and generalized statement that is not specific to any particular union. Instead, it seems to be a broad and negative characterization that could be directed towards members or aspects of various unions. It's important to note that such language is highly biased and does not reflect an objective or fair assessment of unions or their members. Unions can vary widely in their practices, effectiveness, and the satisfaction of their members, and like any large organization, they may have both strengths and weaknesses. It's always more constructive to address specific concerns or issues rather than using generalized negative labels.
- beaeglebeached 3y ago
  You intentionally shortened 'the negligent union parasites who assembled the max' which explicitly tailored to the union who assembled the max. The fact you left out the qualifiers says it all. If I put something like 'the nasty Americans who sold slaves' into chatGPT but cut off 'who sold slaves' you'd get the same sort of inaccurate output.
  - whoknowsidont 3y ago
    You're intentionally being disingenuous to avoid talking about point #1 in my response to you.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
chmod775 3y ago
If you use emotionally charged language like "parasites", don't be surprised people find meaning beyond the most literal interpretations of what you say. To avoid being misunderstood, explain how those quality issues arose from something that is attributable to the union, instead of simply calling their workers negligent and parasites.

whoknowsidont 3y ago

You: Does the phrase "negligent union parasites" refer to one union or is it applicable to many different unions? ChatGPT: The phrase "negligent union parasites" is a derogatory and generalized statement that is not specific to any particular union. Instead, it seems to be a broad and negative characterization that could be directed towards members or aspects of various unions. It's important to note that such language is highly biased and does not reflect an objective or fair assessment of unions or their members. Unions can vary widely in their practices, effectiveness, and the satisfaction of their members, and like any large organization, they may have both strengths and weaknesses. It's always more constructive to address specific concerns or issues rather than using generalized negative labels.

beaeglebeached 3y ago
You intentionally shortened 'the negligent union parasites who assembled the max' which explicitly tailored to the union who assembled the max. The fact you left out the qualifiers says it all. If I put something like 'the nasty Americans who sold slaves' into chatGPT but cut off 'who sold slaves' you'd get the same sort of inaccurate output.
- whoknowsidont 3y ago
  You're intentionally being disingenuous to avoid talking about point #1 in my response to you.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

chmod775 3y ago

If you use emotionally charged language like "parasites", don't be surprised people find meaning beyond the most literal interpretations of what you say. To avoid being misunderstood, explain how those quality issues arose from something that is attributable to the union, instead of simply calling their workers negligent and parasites.