Baselessly ascribing malicious intent is moreso a way to sow distrust and kill off discussion.
And besides, unless local regulations expressly forbid it, the income statements of those companies are after any fines and after any profit reducing measures (e.g. Amazon famously use investment schemes to reduce taxation), they do make the money to cover them in the shorter interval, or even shorter.
It is astonishing to me that, in explaining why “baselessly ascribing malicious intent” is bad you have, in fact, baselessly ascribed the malicious intent of sowing distrust and killing of discussion to the person you are responding to. Incredibly quick hypocrisy turn around there.
Arguably it doesn’t matter if its maliciousness or incompetence, the result is the same.
Ah, but you’re just saying that as a professional troll.
Now compare that to: I think you’re mistaken, intent matters, and I believe extending trust that both parties want to convey something, rather than just dismiss others, is necessary for a discussion, and also for a communal discourse.
If we’re just shouting into the void, no trust is needed, but for interactions and building a sense of community, we will need both trust and norms of collaboration.
You’ve just ascribed malicious intent to me, further demonstrating your own hypocrisy.
If you believe you second paragraph, why do you keep contradicting yourself?
The second paragraph also sounds like manipulative bullshit coming from someone who’s misrepresenting facts. The spirit of collaboration and communal discourse that you’re paying lip service to is smothered by lies and mistruths. You need to rethink how you do things, you’re a walking anachronism.
Intentionally misrepresenting facts is not how one should try and make a point though. It just makes people cynical and distrustful.
Baselessly ascribing malicious intent is moreso a way to sow distrust and kill off discussion.
And besides, unless local regulations expressly forbid it, the income statements of those companies are after any fines and after any profit reducing measures (e.g. Amazon famously use investment schemes to reduce taxation), they do make the money to cover them in the shorter interval, or even shorter.
It is astonishing to me that, in explaining why “baselessly ascribing malicious intent” is bad you have, in fact, baselessly ascribed the malicious intent of sowing distrust and killing of discussion to the person you are responding to. Incredibly quick hypocrisy turn around there.
Arguably it doesn’t matter if its maliciousness or incompetence, the result is the same.
Ah, but you’re just saying that as a professional troll.
Now compare that to: I think you’re mistaken, intent matters, and I believe extending trust that both parties want to convey something, rather than just dismiss others, is necessary for a discussion, and also for a communal discourse. If we’re just shouting into the void, no trust is needed, but for interactions and building a sense of community, we will need both trust and norms of collaboration.
You’ve just ascribed malicious intent to me, further demonstrating your own hypocrisy.
If you believe you second paragraph, why do you keep contradicting yourself?
The second paragraph also sounds like manipulative bullshit coming from someone who’s misrepresenting facts. The spirit of collaboration and communal discourse that you’re paying lip service to is smothered by lies and mistruths. You need to rethink how you do things, you’re a walking anachronism.
Discourse is dead. It’s amazing that anyone who disagrees with you is labelled a troll.