zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. elliot+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-09-16 03:22:50
You didn’t spot the relationship with the “no doesn’t mean no” stuff because as you said in the next sentence, you skipped it. Nice one.
replies(2): >>simonw+h1 >>nirava+R2
2. simonw+h1[view] [source] 2024-09-16 03:38:33
>>elliot+(OP)
> You didn’t spot the relationship with the “no doesn’t mean no” stuff because as you said in the next sentence, you skipped it.

No, it was because I had not read the news about MrBeast having a sexual predator on his team. My interpretation of the earlier comment here was that this should have been a flag that the heading “no doesn’t mean no” should have been called out.

Without that knowledge of the current predator scandal, I don’t think I was wrong to skip that section when writing up my summary. I read that section and it didn’t make my “highlights” list for when I wrote about the document.

I’m being defensive here because it sounds like you are calling me out for something, but I’m not sure what that something is.

replies(1): >>elliot+P01
3. nirava+R2[view] [source] 2024-09-16 04:02:23
>>elliot+(OP)
sigh skip as in skipping to write about it in the blog
◧◩
4. elliot+P01[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-09-16 14:19:27
>>simonw+h1
Fair, it wasn’t clear to me that you meant “skipped writing about it” - I thought you were just some rando that was commenting on something that they skipped over reading in the article (which I now understand you wrote). Sorry for the misunderstanding!
[go to top]