You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

4
-3

[–] EngelbertHumperdinck 4 points -3 points (+1|-4) ago 

This is not to defend anything else @Millenial_Falcon has done or said, but I thought the title was poorly worded as well. What is anti-human trafficking? To me, this headline equates to "Scalise, who was shot, was a supporter of the trafficking of anti-humans." It would be much more succinct to just write, "Scalise, who was shot, was an opponent of human trafficking."

1
1

[–] bopper 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

At the risk of being downvoted, I agree. For a headline that would have been more suitable wording.

[–] [deleted] ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

1
0

[–] EngelbertHumperdinck 1 point 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

The problem is not with the word "proponent". The problem is with the phrase "anti-human trafficking".

Also, although nobody said anything about "proponent" not being a word, or not understanding the word, saying that someone doesn't know a language because they are not familiar with one single word from the language is pretty ridiculous. I'm sure there are many english words that you don't know. What makes this one word the deciding factor which determines if one 'knows' the language or not?

0
0

[–] DeathTooMasons ago 

Who would critique wording? A shill or an idiot, and you are no shill.

0
0

[–] EngelbertHumperdinck ago 

How nice of you to notice.

0
0

[–] srayzie ago 

Big deal. Should we point out something like that just to make the OP feel like shit? We got the point.

0
0

[–] EngelbertHumperdinck ago 

I didn't point it out. My reply was to morojax, who was calling out the mod for being illiterate and not knowing english. But those claims were unfounded, based on the original statement. Sure, the dude might be a shill or a pedo, and if so, then he deserves to die. But I still agree that the headline was poorly written.