I am!
Because the fact that his family, the figures he looked up to, and he himself, all directly benefitted from the system of apartheid that was a specific integral part of the system in South Africa from which they derived their gains?
That is relevant in the same way that saying “he was born in Alabama in the 1850s, is the son of a slaveholding knight of the golden circle, and owns a lot of bedsheets with eyeholes cut in them” would be a valid set of concerns, all of which can be used as valid identifiers that, why, yes, these add together to paint a picture of the culture that this hypothetical man is most likely to espouse. So when he “accidentally” lights a cross on fire while holding a rope with a slipknot in his offhand, do we really think that the tied slipknot at the end of his rope is to lead cattle, or is it more likely that he intends to lynch someone?
That’s all too many words. You don’t need all the exposition. You know how you know the guy you described is a racist? By the the fact that he’s a racist. Doing racist things.
It literally DOES start with that! That’s the top level comment, word-for-word, which at least two people were too thick to understand. So yes, I gave a longer explanation, like I apparently must also provide to you.
Says someone who’s brain is rotten from the internet. “Nah miss me with those books fam, if you can’t say it in one sentence like a viral tweet then I simply can’t use my brain.”
I am! Because the fact that his family, the figures he looked up to, and he himself, all directly benefitted from the system of apartheid that was a specific integral part of the system in South Africa from which they derived their gains?
That is relevant in the same way that saying “he was born in Alabama in the 1850s, is the son of a slaveholding knight of the golden circle, and owns a lot of bedsheets with eyeholes cut in them” would be a valid set of concerns, all of which can be used as valid identifiers that, why, yes, these add together to paint a picture of the culture that this hypothetical man is most likely to espouse. So when he “accidentally” lights a cross on fire while holding a rope with a slipknot in his offhand, do we really think that the tied slipknot at the end of his rope is to lead cattle, or is it more likely that he intends to lynch someone?
That’s all too many words. You don’t need all the exposition. You know how you know the guy you described is a racist? By the the fact that he’s a racist. Doing racist things.
All that other stuff is extra padding.
Sorry use many words. I see question, think want answer. Am wrong?
Depends on your goal. Short communications make bigger impacts.
You’re right! You know what I could have said instead?
See the flaw in using too few words?
I don’t see any flaw. The meaning of that sentence is very clear.
If the post lead with that then maybe there wouldn’t be any complaints.
It literally DOES start with that! That’s the top level comment, word-for-word, which at least two people were too thick to understand. So yes, I gave a longer explanation, like I apparently must also provide to you.
You asked “Am wrong?”.
The content was fine but Your post was not as clear as the top post. That’s what was wrong.
Yes, I added shiny metaphors, explications and implications, because the subtext of the original post was apparently utterly lost on both of them.
Why use many word when few do trick? Because some people don’t understand the few words.
Says someone who’s brain is rotten from the internet. “Nah miss me with those books fam, if you can’t say it in one sentence like a viral tweet then I simply can’t use my brain.”
You wrote a lot of words, but your argument is unclear.