51
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2023
51 points (94.7% liked)
Aotearoa / New Zealand
1651 readers
2 users here now
Kia ora and welcome to !newzealand, a place to share and discuss anything about Aotearoa in general
- For politics , please use !politics@lemmy.nz
- Shitposts, circlejerks, memes, and non-NZ topics belong in !offtopic@lemmy.nz
- If you need help using Lemmy.nz, go to !support@lemmy.nz
- NZ regional and special interest communities
Rules:
FAQ ~ NZ Community List ~ Join Matrix chatroom
Banner image by Bernard Spragg
Got an idea for next month's banner?
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That phrase does not appear in the article. Why are you using a quote that doesn't exist?
This is the crux of the article, which both you and Dave seem unable to comprehend. It seems like a reasonable concern to me.
Because it's clear that's not actually an issue, on account of the massive median strip.
~~This isn't an uncommon use of the tool - kind of a mocking TLDR I guess. In this case I can understand it's not necessarily clear that it's use it satirical.~~ Edit: Turns out the quote was of the body text from this post
The whole point of this post was to query whether RNZ represented his views fairly with the headline, as I felt they did him dirty.
Somewhat disappointingly, most commenters seem to have missed that point.
He quoted your text you dingus.
Did you not read the entire comment chain?
I did. And you said, and I quote:
Because he used the quote symbol for something that wasn't a quote.
Quoting something I said, in a manner that completely changes what was said, and presenting it in a manner that makes it sound like it came from the article is shifty as hell.
You are the only one who thinks any of that. It was perfectly clear he was quoting you. And no, he didn't "completely change what was said".
VS
You don't see how this changes anything?
Nope
As mentioned by DarkThoughts, he is quoting something that exsists: Your own text in this post.
This does not appear in the article, which is heavily implied by the way he used it.
He's also used the quote in a way where it completely changes what was said, which isn't cool either