"Tuesday, July 28th" Topic

150,285

That's quite some lead pile!

People's lives are not a joke!

What lives? All I see is a number, disconnected to anything. It's meaningless. It could refer to almost anything, or to nothing at all.
150,285 what? Boxes? Cakes? Checkers? Days? Rubber chickens? Quatloos?
And even then, a number out of context doesn't mean much of anything, either.
So don't get in a huff. There's nothing in the OP to produce one, if he even meant to produce one.

Really?

Really.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

Sorry I feel what way?

What way ? The way you carried on regarding my post , I simply said That I didn't like the joke. That's all.

No, you said the joke was about people's lives. There was nothing in the original post that said anything about people's lives. It was just a number, with a headline of a date, and therefore meaningless. You assumed it was about "people's lives" (which wasn't ever stated) and then you further assumed that Bill (and everybody else) would think exactly as you thought, and then you offered criticism based on nothing but your own assumptions. That's neither fair nor considerate on your part.

And then you get annoyed because I point out the flaws in your post and your assumptions.

So the onus isn't upon me to prove that your assumption was correct, or that your assumption of others' understanding of your assumption was correct, but rather on you to offer proof that your interpretation of the original post is the correct one AND that others' interpretations would exactly match your own. So far you've done neither.

So again I say, at this point the number is just a number and the date is just a date, disconnected to anything, unless the OP wants to return to explain the number, cite his source, and then explain why he thought it relevant to bring it up here.

Otherwise, assumptions are worthless, and you owe Bill an apology.

I don't think I need to apologize for saying I didn't think a joke wad funny. I know you're a professional writer but you don't get paid by the word here. I believe you've made a mountain out of a molehill and also that I'm entitled to my opinion especially since I don't think I broke any rules.. You too are entitled to yours and you've expressed it.

But neither BIll nor the OP said anything about lives or death. *You* did, and only you did. You apparently assumed that the post had something to do with dead people (I guess— you still haven't said), and then assumed that Bill knew that and that Bill was mocking dead people. You thought the joke wasn't funny because you thought others believed the number was what you thought it was. But we still don't know what the number means, and we're not completely clear on what you think it means because you haven't said.

Logic, man, logic.

On July 28, 2020 the United States surpassed 150,000 deaths from the Coronavirus. It was among the biggest news stories of the day. In my mind that's what the post was about. Maybe I was right or maybe I was wrong. Really doesn't matter does it. The bottom line is that you didn't like my comment and said so. That's your right. Why you continue to harp on this is beyond me. It was my right to express my point of view based on my understanding at the time. You expressed your's and I expressed mine. What's the big deal?

And that marks the first time anyone has given any clarity to the OP, and thus to your post. What you did wrong was assuming that Bill knew what you knew, or that anyone else knew what you knew. I confess I didn't, and despite daily news checks, never saw that number reported or claimed. (Not saying it wasn't, just that it wasn't treated as "big news" by my sources.)

Perhaps we watch/listen/read different news sources. Not unusual these days. I didn't assume anything. I merely said I didn't think the joke was funny and never attributed any of the negative characteristics that you mention to Bill. If you believe I should not have posted that's fine. I stand by what I said and that's it.

"People's lives are not a joke!" That's what you said. If I take this statement literally, then that must mean that you thought Bill was mocking the dead. In order for you to assume Bill was mocking the dead, you had to make the assumption that the post was about a death toll, and you had to make the assumption that Bill also shared your understanding and deliberately acted to mock the same— else he couldn't be accused of mocking the dead, in which case the joke can't be offensive in and of itself. It can only be truly criticized as offensive if both the person making it and the hearer (or reader) are operating on the same understanding of what the original number meant. If they aren't, while the hearer may take offense, the hearer should work to ascertain what the speaker intended.

For the record, knowing now that the number is a reference to COVID-19 deaths, I too would consider the statement to be in poor taste and not funny, but only if Bill knew the reference himself. Otherwise, it's just an error of misunderstanding, not offense.

Once again I said what I said. If you want to assume that I found the joke offensive or viewed Bill as mocking the dead then do so. I didn't say either and in no way ever conceived Bill as mocking the dead. If I thought that I would have said it.