The only subtle thing here is the subtle change in your wording from simple "review" to "determine the quality." I agree with you there, as whether you think something is good or bad is subjective.

But it appears you realize Im right, which is why you're trying to reframe it. Why is it hard for you to admit you were wrong? It's okay, no one is perfect.

[–] Tnaeriv@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I literally gave you a definition that says a review means to determine quality, I just assumed you would make the connection between that definition and the sentence you quoted, but apparently you're too dense for that. The only error I made in this conversation is assuming that your reading comprehension is above that of a 3rd grader

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

I literally gave you a definition that says a review means to determine quality

"Or" do you really not know what that word means? Do you really not realize that when you cherry pick one part of a definition that it doesn't mean none of the others apply?

Are.you really such an idiot that you don't know this? Or is it just that you're willing to be completely dishonest in defense of your ego?

And of course you don't address the fact that I called out your reframing. Stupid and dishonest. Lol

[–] Tnaeriv@sopuli.xyz 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You're only strengthening my theory that you have absolutely no reading comprehension. Or you're just trolling. Literally none of the things you just said make any logical sense whatsoever and I refuse to believe that anyone that passed elementary school can be so absolutely illiterate.

Please do tell me how if I wrote the whole definition there of "determination of the value, nature, character, or quality of something or someone" instead of shortening it to just "determine quality" it would make my entire point completely invalid.

And literally how can you look at my comment and, with straight face, say that I didn't address your claim of "reframing". It was all literally addressing it. But ok, you're a moron so you might have not understood my point so let me put it in simpler terms:

Me show you the definition of word Me give an example Me refer to definiton to show example can be described with word You: that's reframing

Do you see how absurdly idiotic you're being?

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago

Please do tell me how if I wrote the whole definition there of “determination of the value, nature, character, or quality of something or someone” instead of shortening it to just “determine quality” it would make my entire point completely invalid.

You see that "or" in the definition? The word I already pointed out to you in the previous post? It does not mean "the one thing from this list that I get to pick because it makes me not wrong" it means "any of these things." I can't believe someone insulting me as "not having the reading comprehension of a third grader" needs this explained. It's honestly hilarious. Although, can we appreciate for a second that you first said it was "subtle" but now are trying to argue that "it so obvious even a third grader would figure it out." lmao. This is classic. Please keep it up.

Do you see how absurdly idiotic you’re being?

If I'm being absurdly idiotic, god help us because no way in hell we're going to be able to come up with a term describe your stupidity. You're not giving us nearly enough space to reach the depths of your stupidity if the fact that I understand what "or" means makes me "absurdly idiotic." lol