That is not what I commented.
Why are so many arguments on the Internet started like this where a specific, qualified claim is made and then the response tries to pretend a universal, unqualified, ridiculous claim was made instead?
Comment on Some neighbors have no chill
Stern@lemmy.world 1 day agoNo one has ever had a bad neighbor? Or no one has ever complained about petty bullshit on Facebook? Or Karens aren’t real?
aesthelete@lemmy.world 23 hours ago
Stern@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Why are so many arguments on the Internet started like this where a specific, qualified claim is made and then the response tries to pretend a universal, unqualified, ridiculous claim was made instead?
Not sure how this is relevant considering you didn’t make a specific, qualified claim. Saying something “Sounds fake as hell tbh” isn’t a qualified claim by any reasonable metric. If you had instead said, “This sounds fake because <reason>” that would be qualifying your claim.
aesthelete@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
That a particular post “sounds” fake as hell is indeed a specific, qualified claim.
I’m not saying that nothing similar ever happened at any point in time. I’m saying that this particular post sounds fake as hell.
Stern@lemmy.world 10 hours ago
That a particular post “sounds” fake as hell is indeed a specific, qualified claim.
No, it still is not. Qualifying a claim means to carefully scope it and be honest about its limits rather then using a all-encompassing assertion. Saying something sounds fake is not a qualified claim. Saying something sounds fake because many of these ‘Karen’ types of posts are faked on the internet would be one method of qualifying your claim (albeit poorly), while providing specific details about why you believe this one in particular is fake would then be supporting your claim (just to head that argument off.). I encourage you to actually look up some examples of what a qualified claim is if you’re going to try to argue what is and is not one.
I’m not saying that nothing similar ever happened at any point in time which is what you’re trying to get me to defend.
I pointed out numerous counterexamples that we can both agree happen to showcase how this post could be true, which just showcases how your post lacks qualification. Your post was an absolute claim; It doesn’t acknowledge exceptions or counterpoints that one might make.
I’d recommend you bow out of this one, it’s abundantly clear that you’re in over your head here. Or you can keep arguing on the internet about how you’re arguing on the Internet, I’m not your dad. Just some dork who has as much or more free time as you do.
imsufferableninja@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
“nowing their they’re” makes it pretty obvious it’s fake
Stern@lemmy.world 1 day ago
Not really. They use there wrong early on in the rant. If anything, stuff like that makesit more believable to me.