this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Clever Comebacks
1173 readers
3 users here now
Posts of clever comebacks in response to someone.
Rules:
- Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing is allowed but when used to insult someone.
- Discussion is encouraged, but only in good faith. No arguing for arguments sake.
- No bigotry of any kind.
- Censor names/identifying info of everyone who isn’t a public figure.
- If you break the rules you’ll receive one warning before you’re banned.
- Enjoy this community in the light hearted manner it’s intended.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Okay, let's think about this for a second.
Let's say censoredname says that to Paul in person. When is beating someone's ass a legit way to win an argument?
I mean, censoredname is a dick, but violence is a comeback at the level of a caveman.
It's not necessarily a threat of violence. A lot of people would just feel ashamed to criticise other people in person would feel fine to do it on the Internet. Being a dick is a lot harder when you can see the effects of your words on the other person.
Tbf, a threat of violence is only one way to read his response (I know nothing about this Paul dude and his personality, so maybe it was 100% a threat idk).
I could also see his comment as meaning "just because you're behind a computer screen doesn't mean you should feel able to say shit that you'd never say to a person's face", because let's be honest, that's a reminder a lot of folks on the internet could use, regardless of who could kick whose ass
Of course censoredname would never be in any danger saying that to Paul in person, but censoredname would never say it, because of the implication.
I don't read it as him being a dick necessarily. He's saying he's a good commentator. I'd say the same thing about Tony Romo.
I mean, Paul's response didn't seem pleased