• astreus
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Check again.

    “My original comment was a glib link to a wikipedia page. I had not done the research and have edited my comment above”

    To which you replied:

    “Your last sentence here would change the sentiment of your original comment in a positive way. I encourage an edit.”

    I was going to reply with “what, I should edit my comment again to say I have edited my comment” but decided it wasn’t as funny typed as in my head.

    Sorry, mate, you are wrong. But over the most stupidly ridiculously small thing on the internet (and that’s saying something)

    I just want us to be clear: your satisfaction/demands mean literally nothing to me so please don’t take credit for the other poster helping me do my research 🤷‍♂️

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      You’re the one reviving this thread. You posted your top level comment. The other commenter destroyed your bullshit claim, and I said ,“wow this really highlighted the bullshit”. You hadn’t edited then, cause both of our comments wouldn’t make sense.

      Unless you have timestamps, I believe your edit came either at the same time, or after I and the other comment called for you to tidy up your misinformation, which you did. Of course you didn’t do it for me or because of me, I’m not your mom.

      You got called out and are now flailing. Just let it go

      My “you should edit” comment was may 6th at 356.

      Your edit was at may 6 425.

      Edit The point of all of this end of the thread is that token boomer showed up far later than that, of any edits, acting like none of them happened

      • astreus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I’m not flailing, I’m pointing out you are trying to rewrite history.

        On top of that the other commenter didn’t “destroy” my claim nor was it “bullshit”. They added context based on an assumption I didn’t make (i.e. vaccine = cure) which led me to do more research and add context that changed the level of enthusiasm I had.

        What was bullshit was you deciding it was disingenuous AND you saying I had made changes you had requested. Neither of those statements are true.

        “I believe your edit came either at the same time” - you do see the irony of asserting your belief like it’s fact in a thread where I added my belief to a fact and mangled it as a result? You do see it, right?

        I find it kinda funny that I admitted where I was wrong but you are literally unable to.

        Anyway, just clarifying: the OTHER poster got me to edit based on their HELPFUL comments. You didn’t do anything apart from state obvious facts about FDA approval and try to take credit for being so wise and insightful

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I provided timestamps.

          I never did shit but call out the the other dudes comment was good, and yours sucked. The fact you can’t drop this is flailing.

          The fact that you find my fda facts obvious, yet your didn’t use them in your original comment, takes us full circle to why I commented in the first place lol