3 ms·

No, that was your uncharitable reading of what I wrote. This isn't a programming language. Everything we write is context sensitive. It's always going to be th

• kerkeslager 3y ago
  > No, that was your uncharitable reading of what I wrote. I am in general an advocate of assuming the best possible meaning, but there isn't a charitable enough reading to what you said in your first post that makes it mean what you said in your second post. > This isn't a programming language. Everything we write is context sensitive. It's always going to be the reader's responsibility to provide a sensible context. As a reader, you will always be able to frame my writing negatively. True. So what context did I miss that makes "Let your girlfriend know that she deserves treatment on weekends, too." an okay thing to say? All the context I'm seeing there seems to indicate that you are sharing an unqualified opinion on whether someone should be treated for a medical condition on weekends, which is none of your business. Yes, it's readers' responsibility to read charitably, but there is also some burden on the communicator to communicate effectively. Maybe you intended to say something other than what you said, but ultimately readers can only make the best of what you actually said, not what you intended to say. If you intended to say something other than what you said, there's no shame in admitting you misspoke. Mistakes happen. But I'm not going to take the blame for your poor communication if I didn't read your mind when you said something you didn't mean.