• handsoffmydata@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    21 days ago

    I‘d encourage you to read beyond the sub headline. The actual article goes into much more detail.

      • handsoffmydata@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        21 days ago

        Exactly, the sub headline of which I encouraged you to read beyond for more detail. Seems like reading comprehension could be an issue though so best of luck to you.

        • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          21 days ago

          …what? I don’t care where in the article it happened. “Lots” is very informal. “A lot of commercials” would have been slightly better, or simply “many commercials” or “several”.

          Jesus dude. I read the article. I said I didn’t like the phrasing of that line. I don’t care where in the article it happened or if later in the article they changed their wording. That specific line, which I pulled from the article, top or bottom I really don’t care, is informal.

          You then assumed I just stopped reading there? Because I called out something towards the top I must have stopped reading? What is this an ego thing? “They had an issue with the top of the article so clearly they didn’t read any further”. Is that what this whole comment is, an assumption that I didn’t read, and then you personally attacked me because of that assumption?