• NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, I continue to “drone on” about the content of the article which this comment section is about.

    Are you lost? Did you read the article?

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sorry, are you talking about a different article? Or different people?

        Maybe you could quote something from the article which supports your point… you know, like I did.

          • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            “completely” is a quantifier.

            You still haven’t supported your point from the original source. I have. I am not the one struggling with reading comprehension.

              • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What is your point? Do you think this page contains an exhaustive list of quantifiers? “Completely” is a quantifier.

                And… you still haven’t supported your point from the original source.

                • yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  “Completely” is a quantifier.

                  A quantifier of intensity not a quantifier of quantity. This is really not that hard.

                  you still haven’t supported your point from the original source

                  See, this is not how these things work. You’re the one who made a claim about the content of this article. I showed you you’re wrong. That is my point. End of story.

                  • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    You’re the one who made a claim about the content of this article.

                    I didn’t ‘make a claim about the content of this article’ … I quoted content directly from this article.

                    I showed you you’re wrong.

                    No, you haven’t. You’ve given your opinion, which is different from what is proposed in the article. Which is fine, the proposal in the article is poorly thought out and anyone reasonable should have a different opinion… which is my point.