OP has a long history of being incredibly hostile (bordering on abusive) to any perceived criticism - I assume this is why they interpreted “my lack of surprise at an almost tautological result” as somehow being criticism of Huawei or China.
Yeah but when you come in with a tone that is based on previous interactions rather than the current one, anyone who doesn’t know the previous context is going to see you as the combatative and the other commenter as just matching your energy.
Edit: Note that I don’t think your original tone is the issue here, but how you acted like they were out of line for returning the energy felt very… tone deaf.
I’m sorry, I’m not sure I’m following what you mean. I agree about my first comment (which I very much did not intend to be combative or critical of Huawei) - I think it’s pretty clear it was too easy to misinterpret, but OP initially replied to me with an unwarranted degree of defensiveness / hostility which I then subsequently called out. I’m not sure I understand how that was me acting like they were out of line for returning the energy; they brought the energy which I then, to a less harsh extent, returned.
They did aim theirs more directly at you but that first time I read the exchange it did feel like yours had a similar (though less stated) contempt for OP. I can see now that you didn’t necessarily intend that tone to be directed at OP but rather about the situation itself, but that misinterpretation did feel like it was setting a hostile stage that OP’s reply wasn’t an excessive escalation over.
And my last edit was just to say that even if you had intended that snark, it wasn’t (IMO) an unacceptable amount to begin with, but then commenting on the hostility in the response (which I agree wasn’t harsh itself) felt like you were playing the victim because someone fought back in a fight you started.
Btw, this isn’t an attempt to shame you or make you feel bad or anything. I’m only engaging with you about this because you did seem to be asking about the hostility in good faith and I could see why both of you were getting so many downvotes and upvotes from that exchange. Though not sure how useful my analysis will be here, considering it all started from a misinterpreted comment in the first place rather than intended hostility lol.
Ah I see, thank you for taking the time to explain! I’m a little curious how much of that perceived hostility in the initial comment was due to multiple unbiased people misinterpreting it in the same way, and how much of that was because they encountered it within the context of OP immediately responding with such over the top defensiveness (an example of the combative behavior I called out).
Generally on lemmy you have to specify that you’re responding to OP when making a top level comment (“Hey op, not to nitpick but [nitpick]” and similar), otherwise it’s assumed you’re replying to the post title or article. Given that, I’m not entirely sure why someone would assume I was attacking OP directly without the context of OP treating it as a personal attack (and no, to be clear it’s just a response to the headline. I only noticed it was a YogPost™ when they responded).
edit: Which is not to blame OP for the misinterpretation, just curious how that may have lead to further misinterpretation.
Your “I mean… Yeah?” set the tone here.
OP has a long history of being incredibly hostile (bordering on abusive) to any perceived criticism - I assume this is why they interpreted “my lack of surprise at an almost tautological result” as somehow being criticism of Huawei or China.
Yeah but when you come in with a tone that is based on previous interactions rather than the current one, anyone who doesn’t know the previous context is going to see you as the combatative and the other commenter as just matching your energy.
Edit: Note that I don’t think your original tone is the issue here, but how you acted like they were out of line for returning the energy felt very… tone deaf.
I’m sorry, I’m not sure I’m following what you mean. I agree about my first comment (which I very much did not intend to be combative or critical of Huawei) - I think it’s pretty clear it was too easy to misinterpret, but OP initially replied to me with an unwarranted degree of defensiveness / hostility which I then subsequently called out. I’m not sure I understand how that was me acting like they were out of line for returning the energy; they brought the energy which I then, to a less harsh extent, returned.
They did aim theirs more directly at you but that first time I read the exchange it did feel like yours had a similar (though less stated) contempt for OP. I can see now that you didn’t necessarily intend that tone to be directed at OP but rather about the situation itself, but that misinterpretation did feel like it was setting a hostile stage that OP’s reply wasn’t an excessive escalation over.
And my last edit was just to say that even if you had intended that snark, it wasn’t (IMO) an unacceptable amount to begin with, but then commenting on the hostility in the response (which I agree wasn’t harsh itself) felt like you were playing the victim because someone fought back in a fight you started.
Btw, this isn’t an attempt to shame you or make you feel bad or anything. I’m only engaging with you about this because you did seem to be asking about the hostility in good faith and I could see why both of you were getting so many downvotes and upvotes from that exchange. Though not sure how useful my analysis will be here, considering it all started from a misinterpreted comment in the first place rather than intended hostility lol.
Ah I see, thank you for taking the time to explain! I’m a little curious how much of that perceived hostility in the initial comment was due to multiple unbiased people misinterpreting it in the same way, and how much of that was because they encountered it within the context of OP immediately responding with such over the top defensiveness (an example of the combative behavior I called out).
Generally on lemmy you have to specify that you’re responding to OP when making a top level comment (“Hey op, not to nitpick but [nitpick]” and similar), otherwise it’s assumed you’re replying to the post title or article. Given that, I’m not entirely sure why someone would assume I was attacking OP directly without the context of OP treating it as a personal attack (and no, to be clear it’s just a response to the headline. I only noticed it was a YogPost™ when they responded).
edit: Which is not to blame OP for the misinterpretation, just curious how that may have lead to further misinterpretation.