As opposed to, say, highlighting a single word as a reply implying some form of wrongdoing? Or is that less douchey because it’s like a double negative?
Well, it kind of is. It basically equates to saying “whatever” or “who cares” when I’m pretty sure the author of the comic would care. They could’ve just said “my bad, just fixed it” and that’s it. But no, they made the conscious effort to communicate that, even though they fixed it, they don’t really care about it. Which is, in my opinion, kind of a condescending/patronizing/childish/petty/douchey/whateveryouwanttocallit thing to do.
If it was a single word, in a vacuum - sure. But the literal following statement was “it was a cross post but I did the right thing and broke it to fix the problem” sorta applied some context to the prior word.
I read it as “ah shit, yeah, haha lemme get that” and it appears others did as well.
Context matters. So yeah - you can go on thinking you were slighted here over your “observation” with no context… or maybe take this as a “maybe process the whole statement before reacting” critique … which is what it was intended to be.
I really don’t see how “lol” would mean that in this context but ok. Even with the context to me I was more like “idc” or “this isn’t important”. I mean, if they wanted to say “whoops”, they could’ve said “whoops”.
Could I be the one that misinterpreted what they intended to say? Of course, I’m not a native speaker and (being the human that I am) I can make mistakes. However, the general response seems to be more aggressive than communicative, which is one of the reasons why I started to really dislike Reddit and the interactions on that platform.
I really don’t see how “lol” would mean that in this context but ok. Even with the context to me I was more like “idc” or “this isn’t important”. I mean, if they wanted to say “whoops”, they could’ve said “whoops”. […]
Semantics. Regardless of how you (or anyone else) read the first word: the following statement provided the appropriate result and explanation. The case was opened and closed. A positive outcome was achieved (accreditation of the author.)
Returning to my original assertion: what was the purpose of your statement? Your statement lacked context. If people misunderstood you (I don’t think they did) … one word doesn’t exactly leave things terribly clear does it? This isn’t a they (op) thing.
Regarding your statement about language: When I am in an area where I don’t speak the local language - I rely more heavily on context to fill in the gaps in my knowledge. I believe that to be fairly standard. This wasn’t, by my assessment, a situation where someone could be misinterpreted unless the remainder of their statement was disregarded. Could I be off base? Sure - but I genuinely doubt I am.
To point out (what I thought was) a needlessly condescending response.
Your statement lacked context.
It did not. I think it was quite clear how I interpreted the comment I replied to. I mean, you got it. Even if you disagreed.
I rely more heavily on context to fill in the gaps in my knowledge
Again, I was not lacking context. Having “context” doesn’t mean that a sentence does not negate the fact that a sentence can still be ambiguous. I think this is perfectly exemplified in this thread.
My point stands. People are way too eager to be aggressive/mock other people when they get the chance instead of considering that the other person might A) just have a different opinion or B) they misunderstood something. When I first started using Lemmy this did not happen so it’s a shame that it seems to be attracting the same crowd that made virtual interaction so unappealing in Reddit.
“Lol”
My dude: he made the swap when it was pointed out. Did you want a long form apology in 10 pt font?
Ah this explains why i was confused thinking “these are the same picture”
Some light grovelling wouldn’t go astray.
Not really, just that they could have omitted the “lol” to sound a bit less douchey.
As opposed to, say, highlighting a single word as a reply implying some form of wrongdoing? Or is that less douchey because it’s like a double negative?
Well, it kind of is. It basically equates to saying “whatever” or “who cares” when I’m pretty sure the author of the comic would care. They could’ve just said “my bad, just fixed it” and that’s it. But no, they made the conscious effort to communicate that, even though they fixed it, they don’t really care about it. Which is, in my opinion, kind of a condescending/patronizing/childish/petty/douchey/whateveryouwanttocallit thing to do.
But hey, fuck me, right?
If it was a single word, in a vacuum - sure. But the literal following statement was “it was a cross post but I did the right thing and broke it to fix the problem” sorta applied some context to the prior word.
I read it as “ah shit, yeah, haha lemme get that” and it appears others did as well.
Context matters. So yeah - you can go on thinking you were slighted here over your “observation” with no context… or maybe take this as a “maybe process the whole statement before reacting” critique … which is what it was intended to be.
I really don’t see how “lol” would mean that in this context but ok. Even with the context to me I was more like “idc” or “this isn’t important”. I mean, if they wanted to say “whoops”, they could’ve said “whoops”.
Could I be the one that misinterpreted what they intended to say? Of course, I’m not a native speaker and (being the human that I am) I can make mistakes. However, the general response seems to be more aggressive than communicative, which is one of the reasons why I started to really dislike Reddit and the interactions on that platform.
Semantics. Regardless of how you (or anyone else) read the first word: the following statement provided the appropriate result and explanation. The case was opened and closed. A positive outcome was achieved (accreditation of the author.)
Returning to my original assertion: what was the purpose of your statement? Your statement lacked context. If people misunderstood you (I don’t think they did) … one word doesn’t exactly leave things terribly clear does it? This isn’t a they (op) thing.
Regarding your statement about language: When I am in an area where I don’t speak the local language - I rely more heavily on context to fill in the gaps in my knowledge. I believe that to be fairly standard. This wasn’t, by my assessment, a situation where someone could be misinterpreted unless the remainder of their statement was disregarded. Could I be off base? Sure - but I genuinely doubt I am.
To point out (what I thought was) a needlessly condescending response.
It did not. I think it was quite clear how I interpreted the comment I replied to. I mean, you got it. Even if you disagreed.
Again, I was not lacking context. Having “context” doesn’t mean that a sentence does not negate the fact that a sentence can still be ambiguous. I think this is perfectly exemplified in this thread.
My point stands. People are way too eager to be aggressive/mock other people when they get the chance instead of considering that the other person might A) just have a different opinion or B) they misunderstood something. When I first started using Lemmy this did not happen so it’s a shame that it seems to be attracting the same crowd that made virtual interaction so unappealing in Reddit.
Lmao