Them saying Joe Rogan’s podcast is “toxic, diseased, and damaging to society” is not better critique than the other poster calling this comic dog shit. Both are just statements that provide no argument or reasoning behind the statements. Sure they could back it up with examples why it is so, but so could the other commenter, which would make either of those comments valid criticism, but without they are equally good (or bad) criticism.
I think it’s fine because we were operating on an implicit set of shared knowledge. Not every communication needs to be a research paper.
I have no understanding (implicit or explicit) of why the original commenter hated this comic, and clearly that’s the case for the vast majority of the voters here.
Providing 2-3 lines of explanatory context is hardly a research paper, but enough to illustrate reason behind a simple statement.
AFAIK, the author of this comic is somewhat of an asshat that exercises varying degree of censorship on a comic strip subreddit, based on their personal beliefs.
like i replied to the original comment that person is complaining about, she’s had some really dumb takes but is usually in the right ballpark. those dumb takes were also cases where she doubled down and yeah, that subreddit is basically a safespace for their superusers/content creators.
Them saying Joe Rogan’s podcast is “toxic, diseased, and damaging to society” is not better critique than the other poster calling this comic dog shit. Both are just statements that provide no argument or reasoning behind the statements. Sure they could back it up with examples why it is so, but so could the other commenter, which would make either of those comments valid criticism, but without they are equally good (or bad) criticism.
exactly.
I think it’s fine because we were operating on an implicit set of shared knowledge. Not every communication needs to be a research paper.
I have no understanding (implicit or explicit) of why the original commenter hated this comic, and clearly that’s the case for the vast majority of the voters here.
Providing 2-3 lines of explanatory context is hardly a research paper, but enough to illustrate reason behind a simple statement.
AFAIK, the author of this comic is somewhat of an asshat that exercises varying degree of censorship on a comic strip subreddit, based on their personal beliefs.
like i replied to the original comment that person is complaining about, she’s had some really dumb takes but is usually in the right ballpark. those dumb takes were also cases where she doubled down and yeah, that subreddit is basically a safespace for their superusers/content creators.