• Dispassionate@quokk.auOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    27 天前

    The part where it never actually happened.

    Also, if you only read the title, then you don’t get to have an opinion.

    Did you read each line of the article?

    • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      27 天前

      I mean, it did though. They effectively said that. The article is a little satire-y, but barely.

      Also, I’m a human out of your control, so fuck you, I get to have any opinion I want.

      • Dispassionate@quokk.auOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        27 天前

        I never said you couldn’t have that opinion, but I do not value it and I don’t think anyone else should value it either.

        Anyway, this is getting boring and I have a lot of stuff to do so I’m just gonna block this account as well and get on with life. I hope you have a wonderful time!!

    • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      27 天前

      The title is the part we have opinions of, you bait factory. People read your headlines and aren’t immediately aware it’s satire, which is what makes it bad at being satire.

      You don’t know what constructive criticism looks like.

      Case in point: this actually happened. The Chinese government blatantly said they’d punish criticism globally, as a cute little addendum to blatantly saying they’d enforce a monoculture over irrelevant minorities… like the entirety of Tibet. Their defense of this amounted to ‘we’re already doing it, shut the fuck up.’

        • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          27 天前

          Images, obviously. Text arguably. Neither of which would bother me terribly if this dingus had any consistent standards. Or I’d at least understand tossing off no-effort content and then shrugging at the lazy misses. But no - they keep up a whole-ass authorial persona, and seem genuinely offended by the simplest push to improve, despite nakedly stating that negative responses are part of their goal. It is time for boot to meet ass.