a) An event occurred. b) Event was reported. c) Event was re-reported with spin to imply generalizations. By the time it got back to where I saw it here in this group, it’s “Generalization are why broader category generalizations are ok when [x] does it but not [y], and as a member of [y], I will imply that event occurred because [y] is not allowed to do what [x] does because I will imply that [x] now owns broader category generalization that [x] always implies that [y] does, but as “event occurred” clearly proves, [x] is worse than [y] therefore [y] is better and [x] is always wrong.”

a) An event occurred.
b) Event was reported.
c) Event was re-reported with spin to imply generalizations.

By the time it got back to where I saw it here in this group, it’s “Generalization are why broader category generalizations are ok when [x] does it but not [y], and as a member of [y], I will imply that event occurred because [y] is not allowed to do what [x] does because I will imply that [x] now owns broader category generalization that [x] always implies that [y] does, but as “event occurred” clearly proves, [x] is worse than [y] therefore [y] is better and [x] is always wrong.”

====

I’m implying it’s a common problem these days among those who align themselves as “anti-SJWs.

We’re all media now.

====

 

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]