• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    But it sure as Hell is within the scope of an article that purports to consult with multiple experts to arrive at solutions to the problem. So where the fuck is the paragraph about what the DV expert had to say? It isn’t there, and that’s what I’ve been complaining about this whole damn time!

    The article is shit and deserves to be downvoted because – as you have just effectively admitted – it fails to even cite the right experts in the first place. Which means you trying to paint me as wrong for disregarding experts that don’t even exist in the article is, again, complete and utter bullshit. Q-E-fucking-D.

    • NateNate60@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      Disagree. Not every article has to cover absolutely everything.

      It’s like talking about problems with drug addiction. There are two facets:

      1. How to detect people who are at high risk of addiction or already addicted and refer them to the right treatment resources
      2. How to prevent the societal issues that drive people to addiction in the first place

      You do not need to present a solution to both in order to present a good solution to 1.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Even if that’s true – and I’m not conceding that point – that’s not the argument you’ve been making. Instead, you started off this whole thing by trying to ridicule me for strawman nonsense you made up, and haven’t even apologized yet. I’m really sick and tired of your blatant bad faith.