4 ms·

> You're all extremely clever and I can't seem to understand how you missed thinking about such a simple edge case [...] I wouldn't be surprised if they left t

> You're all extremely clever and I can't seem to understand how you missed thinking about such a simple edge case [...] I wouldn't be surprised if they left this loophole on purpose to give some (their?) agents extra leverage. Edit #1: I didn't mean to imply bad intent; just thinking out loud. Edit #2: Please, downvote responsibly. I deserve every one. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FHEeG_uq5Y https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FHEeG_uq5Y

cjsaltlake 1y ago
We absolutely did not.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- coldtea 1y ago
  Of course that's what a team that did it on purpose would also say :)
gchamonlive 1y ago
> I didn't mean to imply bad intent > I wouldn't be surprised if they left this loophole on purpose You didn't imply bad intent, you outright suggested it.
- mustaphah 1y ago
  I could've phrased it better.
  - gchamonlive 1y ago
    You could rewrite it a 1000 times, if the underlying idea is the same, suggesting something you don't know it's true, the outcome would be the same. Or did you mean something else? What was your intention with the message?
    - mustaphah 1y ago
      I meant it as a hint for anyone inclined to dig deeper. It's a possibility rather than something we can confidently dismiss.
      - gchamonlive 1y ago
        If it's a possibility and you don't want to dig deeper better to sit out and not comment anything at all, lest you risk defamation. Thinking out loud also doesn't make defamation acceptable.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        TheDong 1y ago
        It's fine, this is an american site so JAQing is in fact safe under free speech. You're welcome to ask b "would none rid me of this meddlesome priest" with no fear
        gchamonlive 1y ago
        And I'm protected under free speech to try to educate people about good manners, so it's fine too.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        "It's probably not X, but we should consider X as we look at this." and "I feel like this might be X but I'm 50:50 on it." are not anywhere near defamation. You have to get a lot closer to certainty before it's an issue. And listing out "a possibility but you don't want to dig deeper" is often a good contribution to a conversation. In this case they worded it badly, but the basic idea of the comment isn't awful.
- coldtea 1y ago
  He means he doesn't say it was necessarily bad intent, but mentions it as a possibility ("thinking out loud").
  - gchamonlive 1y ago
    Thinking out loud isn't a free pass to say stuff without consequences. Sure we are all protected under free speech, but free speech doesn't remove the meaning and the impact words have in the world.
faangguyindia 1y ago
never attribute something to malice which can be attributed to incompetence. Basically, this has been utilized plenty of times by some really smart folk to get what they want.

cjsaltlake 1y ago

We absolutely did not.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
coldtea 1y ago
Of course that's what a team that did it on purpose would also say :)

gchamonlive 1y ago

> I didn't mean to imply bad intent > I wouldn't be surprised if they left this loophole on purpose You didn't imply bad intent, you outright suggested it.

mustaphah 1y ago
I could've phrased it better.
- gchamonlive 1y ago
  You could rewrite it a 1000 times, if the underlying idea is the same, suggesting something you don't know it's true, the outcome would be the same. Or did you mean something else? What was your intention with the message?
  - mustaphah 1y ago
    I meant it as a hint for anyone inclined to dig deeper. It's a possibility rather than something we can confidently dismiss.
    - gchamonlive 1y ago
      If it's a possibility and you don't want to dig deeper better to sit out and not comment anything at all, lest you risk defamation. Thinking out loud also doesn't make defamation acceptable.
      - deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - TheDong 1y ago
        It's fine, this is an american site so JAQing is in fact safe under free speech. You're welcome to ask b "would none rid me of this meddlesome priest" with no fear
        gchamonlive 1y ago
        And I'm protected under free speech to try to educate people about good manners, so it's fine too.
        deleted 1y ago
        [deleted]
      - Dylan16807 1y ago
        "It's probably not X, but we should consider X as we look at this." and "I feel like this might be X but I'm 50:50 on it." are not anywhere near defamation. You have to get a lot closer to certainty before it's an issue. And listing out "a possibility but you don't want to dig deeper" is often a good contribution to a conversation. In this case they worded it badly, but the basic idea of the comment isn't awful.
coldtea 1y ago
He means he doesn't say it was necessarily bad intent, but mentions it as a possibility ("thinking out loud").
- gchamonlive 1y ago
  Thinking out loud isn't a free pass to say stuff without consequences. Sure we are all protected under free speech, but free speech doesn't remove the meaning and the impact words have in the world.

faangguyindia 1y ago

never attribute something to malice which can be attributed to incompetence. Basically, this has been utilized plenty of times by some really smart folk to get what they want.