3 ms·
It's not plain sarcasm to purposefully misinform somebody asking a legitimate question. They asked for a definition, not your opinion. If you consider your pare
by llbbdd 8mo ago
It'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 8mo ago"Misinform" ? You do realize we're supposed to be like humans talking, and not robots exchanging PDUs, right?
- llbbdd 8mo agoIf that's your excuse to respond with a useless charged non-sequitor, whatever works for you.
- mindslight 8mo agoListen, nobody likes the whoosh but you'd do better treating it as an opportunity for growth.
- llbbdd 8mo agoYou're right, I'll leave the defense of the constitution to you. o7
- mindslight 8mo agoPlease don't.
- 7bit 8mo agoWhat a toxic response.
- 7bit 8mo 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 8mo 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 8mo 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.