what they asked is simply a request for you to explain your motivations, since they seem nonsensical to the previous poster.
(and immediately jumping to “personal attack” when someone is trying to understand you doesn’t exactly imply “peak intellect” either. and btw, your snarky “peak intellect” <-- THAT’S a personal attack. phrasing it as a statement doesn’t make it less of an insult.)
No. Vaguely implying that someone has a problem is very much a personal attack. I understand that you’re upset by my opinions but how about you cry me a river?
Either way you interpret it, there’s no constructive intention. Simply saying it and not elaborating is an insult, a personal attack or whatever you want to call it.
if you think it is, then that’s a misunderstanding of the expression on your part.
it was neutral, and it was even accompanied by an “lmao” to indicate that it shouldn’t be taken all that seriously.
if you choose to interpret it only in the strictest possible, probably because you were already upset in the first place, I’m sorry to say, that’s on you. not them.
it was an okay-ish comment:
neither especially offensive, nor especially friendly.
maybe read it again when you’re more chilled out? merely a suggestion…
Reach and convenience. Why do you think podcasts exist on YouTube when they could’ve as well been audio-only?
Besides, some people like to see the speaker, because it gives visual clues about what’s being said. Not everybody absorbs info efficiently through reading texts or just listening. Sometimes you need more than one way of recieving information.
That’s just wrong.
Why post it to youtube in that case? If you’re watching a video where the only the audio is relevant, why the fuck is it a video?
“Why isn’t this text?”
YouTube has more accessibility and reach.
“Then why isn’t it an audio file?!?!?!”
Fucking what? You seem to just be upset that this exists in a way people will access.
what’s your problem? lmao
Going for personal attacks when you cannot think of a response? Peak intellect.
You called someone an ignorant prick in this thread. Appeals to decorum are off the table for you, fuckhead.
that wasn’t a personal attack.
a personal attack would be:
“man, are you just a dick or what?”
what they asked is simply a request for you to explain your motivations, since they seem nonsensical to the previous poster.
(and immediately jumping to “personal attack” when someone is trying to understand you doesn’t exactly imply “peak intellect” either. and btw, your snarky “peak intellect” <-- THAT’S a personal attack. phrasing it as a statement doesn’t make it less of an insult.)
No. Vaguely implying that someone has a problem is very much a personal attack. I understand that you’re upset by my opinions but how about you cry me a river?
“what’s your problem?” is a common expression. it’s a phrase, it isn’t literal.
Either way you interpret it, there’s no constructive intention. Simply saying it and not elaborating is an insult, a personal attack or whatever you want to call it.
yeah, no.
it just straight up isn’t.
if you think it is, then that’s a misunderstanding of the expression on your part.
it was neutral, and it was even accompanied by an “lmao” to indicate that it shouldn’t be taken all that seriously.
if you choose to interpret it only in the strictest possible, probably because you were already upset in the first place, I’m sorry to say, that’s on you. not them.
it was an okay-ish comment:
neither especially offensive, nor especially friendly.
maybe read it again when you’re more chilled out? merely a suggestion…
Reach and convenience. Why do you think podcasts exist on YouTube when they could’ve as well been audio-only?
Besides, some people like to see the speaker, because it gives visual clues about what’s being said. Not everybody absorbs info efficiently through reading texts or just listening. Sometimes you need more than one way of recieving information.