TL;DR? Why not just go watch another five second video of a kitten with its head in a toilet roll, or a 140 character description of a meal your friend just stuffed in their mouth. “nom nom”. This blog post is not for you.
not trying to be combative, but this grumpy response over a 5min read does illustrate something and i hope its trolling tbh. the tldr summary that is triggering here is kinda a key point of the article - people looking for a quick interaction and then moving on.
this fails to be the point of the article unless the article is suggesting people are moving on to quick interactions because they are deliberately being moved away from longer articles by the authors that suggest these articles aren’t worth their time… is the point of the article that longer content is belligerent and condescending?
I don’t think it’s actually getting any point across. it’s just a boomer who thinks no one has anything better to do.
wow, this some next level obnoxious boomer shit.
Is it incorrect?
there is no statement there so I don’t know what you mean by “incorrect”. all i see is someone who doesn’t know how people use tldr.
Was it too long for you and you didn’t read it?
In that case …This blog post is not for you.
That’s what the question mark does. It marks a question.
RTFA? RTFA!
I didn’t read it because the tldr is retarded.
Or someone who knows very well people use tldr to skip reading the post and you are annoyed that he caught you being that lazy.
valuing my time isn’t lazy. if you can’t summarize your post you’re probably shit at writing and the article is not worth the time in the first place.
not trying to be combative, but this grumpy response over a 5min read does illustrate something and i hope its trolling tbh. the tldr summary that is triggering here is kinda a key point of the article - people looking for a quick interaction and then moving on.
this is what i mean by shit at writing.
this fails to be the point of the article unless the article is suggesting people are moving on to quick interactions because they are deliberately being moved away from longer articles by the authors that suggest these articles aren’t worth their time… is the point of the article that longer content is belligerent and condescending?
I don’t think it’s actually getting any point across. it’s just a boomer who thinks no one has anything better to do.
In the sense that I don’t believe the people described exist in any significant quantity, yes.
If you are offended by this, then you obviously didn’t read the article.
The definition of cringe, gramps needs 70ccs of sensory content, stat