I disagree. It is a good example where it is obvious or close to obvious what was intended. The remark simply damaged the signal to noise ratio while avoiding grappling with the point.
True—but I don’t think it would ordinarily have been down-voted that hard, for that sin.
It is possible that some general annoyance with the user also resulted in the total.
I disagree. It is a good example where it is obvious or close to obvious what was intended. The remark simply damaged the signal to noise ratio while avoiding grappling with the point.
True—but I don’t think it would ordinarily have been down-voted that hard, for that sin.
It is possible that some general annoyance with the user also resulted in the total.