4 ms·
Sarcasm has nothing to do with bad faith. Posting comments in support of the Constitution costs karma half the time these days. And for virtue signalling, we su
by mindslight 9mo ago
Sarcasm has nothing to do with bad faith. Posting comments in support of the Constitution costs karma half the time these days. And for virtue signalling, we sure had it pretty good. It would be nice if our society could go back to virtue signalling instead of vice signalling.
- llbbdd 9mo agoIt's not plain sarcasm to purposefully misinform somebody asking a legitimate question. They asked for a definition, not your opinion. If you consider your parent comment "supporting the Constitution" maybe you should evaluate whether that was effectively communicated.
- mindslight 9mo ago"Misinform" ? You do realize we're supposed to be like humans talking, and not robots exchanging PDUs, right?
- llbbdd 9mo agoIf that's your excuse to respond with a useless charged non-sequitor, whatever works for you.
- mindslight 9mo agoListen, nobody likes the whoosh but you'd do better treating it as an opportunity for growth.
- llbbdd 9mo agoYou're right, I'll leave the defense of the constitution to you. o7
- mindslight 9mo agoPlease don't.
- 7bit 9mo agoWhat a toxic response.
- 7bit 9mo agoThere's nothing in the reply that suggests sarcasm. How do you expect people who don't already know the answer, to identify the response as sarcasm?
- mindslight 9mo agoContext - the sibling comments, the things I said afterwards, and that the answer is easily searchable. IMO the toxicity here is from the other commenter insisting on taking what I said literally, and then digging in and fortifying that demand rather than just taking a step back.
- Larrikin 9mo agoA 2 second Google search, GPT2, or reading the article before commenting could have answered their question. It's rude to readers of this site to litter the board with lazy questions like that.