4 ms·
> He wrote back and said "LOL, too long." Some nerve
by triceratops 1y ago
> He wrote back and said "LOL, too long."
Some nerve
- gorjusborg 1y agoSeriously. It took more time to respond with disrespect than to just ignore it.
- triceratops 1y agoI meant more the nerve to say it was "too long". Ed Zitron may be right but he's got no right to accuse anyone else of writing too many words.
- sharkjacobs 1y agoIt's a rude response from someone whose public persona is famously rude and abrasive. It's also worth considering the difference between publishing 10000 words to an audience of subscribers, and sending 10000 words unsolicited to a stranger.
- azemetre 1y agoThere’s no proof that this exchange ever happened. Happy to eat crow if proven wrong. I’ve disagreed and argued with Ed on his subreddit, he never banned me or acted hostile.
- atonse 1y agoEspecially rude given, if he was feeling it was too long, he could've had an AI summarize it. But this shows a certain intellectual laziness/dishonesty and immaturity in the response. Someone's taken the time to write a response to your article, you can choose to learn from it (assuming it's not an angry rant), or you could just ignore it. In fact, that completely dismisses this stupid article for me.
- watwut 1y agoI mean, using ai to summarise someone's arguments and then using ir in any way would be considerably more dishonest, lazy and rude. Like, expectation that he will treat an unsolicited email with all seriousness is absurd in the first place, but ai summarize it would be wtf.
- atonse 1y agoNot responding was a perfectly good neutral action. Instead they chose to respond with a "LOL" and saying it was too long, like they're a pretty unintellectual person. Let's agree to disagree.