this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
575 points (93.6% liked)

Fuck Cars

9642 readers
343 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yA3xAKQMbq@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)
[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub -4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

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 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

"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 -3 points 11 months 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.