4 ms·
It's possible to communicate in a casual, conversational, and humorous manner without alienating minorities and delivering insults, and the author chose not to.
by yomslice 12y ago
It's possible to communicate in a casual, conversational, and humorous manner without alienating minorities and delivering insults, and the author chose not to.
I think it's unlikely that he was trying to be malicious and is probably just not sensitive to what it's like to be on the receiving end of some of his examples.
- warkdarrior 12y agoNowadays it is impossible to be humorous without alienating someone. For any attempt at humor, I can find someone who will feel oppressed.
- dragonwriter 12y agoIts never been possible to be humorous without content that would alienate someone; nowadays, its just that communication is more ubiquitous so you're more likely to reach that person and hear back from them.
- LBarret 12y agoAren't you imputing motives without proof ? While I respect your sensibility, I would have made the same kind of remarks without thinking it would hurt someone. I understand it could, but it wouldn't have been my intent. Also remember that your position is very very US-centric. But I am all for communication : explain your point to the author and propose something else that is as funny as the current text. But saying the author chose not to is simply dishonest.
- ulisesrmzroche 12y agoIf we're talking about motives and proof, then The fact that you understand what you said is harmful and you choose to do it anyway is the legal definition of intent.