Israeli foreign ministry posts video of Thunberg’s arrest; vessels carrying about 500 activists intercepted about 75 miles off coast of war-torn territory

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Read usernames! I didn’t use it like that, I didn’t use it at all for that matter.

    I’m fully aware you’re a different user, but I’m specifically talking about this comment that you made. Emphasis mine.

    They are only doing it for publicity. It’s quite literally getting very publicly arrested to bring light to and test the blockade in court as a matter of international law. What other purpose do you think they have?

    Which is why I said this.

    Your pedantry on the usage of the term publicity does not align with how people colloquially use the phrase “only for publicity.”

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      What is factually incorrect about the quoted comment. I’ll wait.

      Also you left of the part where I made it clear that I would not use it as an implication.

      Ed:

      They are literally doing it for attention, but yes I agree slanting it as a negative is unwise and misleading.

      I’ll put it this way. You’re implying attention seeking behavior is always negative which simply isn’t the case. There have been a number of protestors who set themselves on fire in protest which is unarguably attention seeking behavior. Is that a negative thing to do? My opinion is no.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Like I said already, your usage of the phrase doesn’t align with the way people use it and that’s why you’re getting push back. That’s all I’m saying. I’m implying nothing else.

            • Madison420@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 hours ago

              Not listening well enough to answer a yes or no question it seems.

              Alright, then define exactly what you’re taking issue with me about and let’s get to it.

              • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                36 minutes ago

                I feel like a broken record player here. I’m just explaining that your pedantic, hyper-literal usage of the phrase “only for publicity” is extremely different from how other people use it and this causes an emotional response in people.

                Also, if we’re being hyper-literal, it is factually inaccurate. They are still trying to bring food and medical supplies. They are not only trying to raise awareness on the issue.

                • Madison420@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  16 minutes ago

                  Where exactly am I relying on a “hyper-literal” usage of the phrase? I’d like a direct quote if possible.

                  It’s not factually inaccurate, she wants the attention it’s just not a negative. “She wants to be known for bringing attention to just causes and generally being empathetic” is only an insult if you’re incapable of empathy in which case who actually cares what they think.

                  Again, I don’t think you’re listening and at this point you’re too invested in your odd belief.

                  Similarly, yes or no. It was a simple question your avoiding because it would destroy your point.

                  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    12 minutes ago

                    I’ve directly quoted the exact phrase people are taking issue with multiple times. I’ve explained to you that while not factually inaccurate, because you are using a phrase differently than most people, they take issue with it. The fact that you just ignore me and keep saying “it’s factual” and that I’m “not listening” proves you yourself aren’t listening to me telling you that it’s precisely because you’re using the phrase differently from most people that they’re upset. If you just want to be pedantic, that’s fine. I’ve only been trying to explain it to you since you didn’t seem to understand why people are upset. But I’m not gonna waste more of my time trying to help you understand why people are upset.