1d ago

Also a plumber

Show Context

111 comments

Again: Varyk asked about a single aspect (whether or not Katy Perry has called herself an astronaut) and got a 40 minute video about the whole thing. No text summary or indication of whether or not the actual question would be answered, just "watch this"
Sometimes people know about the general subject already, but just need conformation on a detail.
It's very rarely good practice to answer surface level questions with links to long deep dive videos.
Even if the recipient WOULD like the full picture, an article is MUCH easier to skim or digest whenever you want to.
A video is a time commitment and 40 minutes is about 38 minutes past the maximum reasonable time to answer a quick question.
There could not have been a more relevant and helpful response explaining the situation
Relevant? Possibly. Helpful? For reasons explained above, nope. Not really.
in light of Varys' rather shallow question that seemed to indicate a lack of understanding of the full context here…
You don't know that. You just assumed that it was a rhetorical question meant to end discussion rather than an honest question meant to provide context on whether or not the meme itself is fair to Katy Perry. In assuming ignorance and bad faith, you're being very unfair to Varys.
Btw, just in case they haven't found out themselves, here's an ACTUAL answer to the ACTUAL questoion:as far as I've been able to find out, she's NOT self-identified as an astronaut.
While that's not conclusive, it's more than likely that a lot of people would comment on it if she did, so someone who knows how to look not finding anything in one eighth of the runtime of that video would make it highly improbable.
- It's exceedingly common for a question about one narrow thing to be an indicator of desire for knowledge about a broader topic. There was basically no reason to believe this wasn't the case here, and the incredibly rude response from both of you to a user being helpful is really not a good look.
  
  It's exceedingly common for a question about one narrow thing to be an indicator of desire for knowledge about a broader topic
  It's MUCH more common for a question about one thing to be an indicator of desire for knowledge of just one thing.
  There was basically no reason to believe this wasn't the case here
  Except for Occam's Razor and, you know, how language works.
  the incredibly rude response from both of you to a user being helpful is really not a good look.
  You're the one being incredibly rude by insisting that an illogical assumption was the only possible interpretation of a straightforward question and that pointing that out is somehow bad.
  If I asked you if it's raining, would you link me to a deep dive about evaporation and atmospheric pressure? Do you think that would be helpful?
  
  You’re the one being incredibly rude by insisting that an illogical assumption was the only possible interpretation
  No, I'm pushing back against how rude the two of you are being.
  If you had just stayed silent because you weren't even involved in this, and if the other user had given a polite "thanks, but I'm already aware of this and just wanted an answer to that one question", things might have been different.
  But that's not what happened. You came in guns blazing, and so did they. Ironic, considering further down the thread they also made it very clear that they don't already know the full context here.
  
  I made one flippant but accurate comment for laughs.
  You're the one who made a huge deal about it by holding your incorrect assumptions to be undeniable Truth.
  Just give the windmills you're tilting at a fucking rest already.

111 comments