4 ms·
Sticking to facts ruffles less feathers than adding a charged interpretation to the facts, it's not very surprising. ("X is more likely to correct you" can obv
by praptak 2y ago
Sticking to facts ruffles less feathers than adding a charged interpretation to the facts, it's not very surprising.
("X is more likely to correct you" can obviously also have a negatively charged interpretation, which I'm leaving as an exercise to the reader)
- like_any_other 2y agoI suppose you're right - to highlight the implied, or shall we say, permitted interpretation, I was forced to give a contrasting interpretation, when the source text was indeed purely factual.
- itronitron 2y agoX may be more likely to correct you simply because there are more of them, which is different from saying that someone is more likely to correct you "especially if they are X"