• Dispassionate@quokk.auOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      25 days ago

      You can have your opinions, but…

      https://www.dictionary.com/browse/satire

      1. the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, to expose, denounce, or deride the folly or corruption of institutions, people, or social structures.

      2. a work of art, literature, or entertainment in which the folly and corruption of human beings, institutions, or social structures are exposed, denounced, or ridiculed.

      • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        25 days ago

        And how does that apply here?

        After looking at this exchange and some of the other things you’ve posted, it seems like this guy is making some valid points. You’re not actually arguing against what anyone says, you’re just trying to do gotcha responses or are saying “I’m blocking you”.

        • Dispassionate@quokk.auOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          25 days ago

          That’s the definition of satire. They say it’s not satire. We say this just isn’t a publication for them.

          • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            25 days ago

            Right, I understand the exchange. I’m asking you, what part of that headline fits the definition of satire? You keep claiming that it’s satire, but like 75% of what you’re posting is just bluntly/clickbaity worded news, not satire.

            • Dispassionate@quokk.auOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              25 days ago

              The part where it never actually happened.

              Also, if you only read the title, then you don’t get to have an opinion.

              Did you read each line of the article?

              • Assassassin@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                25 days ago

                I mean, it did though. They effectively said that. The article is a little satire-y, but barely.

                Also, I’m a human out of your control, so fuck you, I get to have any opinion I want.

                • Dispassionate@quokk.auOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  25 days ago

                  I never said you couldn’t have that opinion, but I do not value it and I don’t think anyone else should value it either.

                  Anyway, this is getting boring and I have a lot of stuff to do so I’m just gonna block this account as well and get on with life. I hope you have a wonderful time!!

              • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                25 days ago

                The title is the part we have opinions of, you bait factory. People read your headlines and aren’t immediately aware it’s satire, which is what makes it bad at being satire.

                You don’t know what constructive criticism looks like.

                Case in point: this actually happened. The Chinese government blatantly said they’d punish criticism globally, as a cute little addendum to blatantly saying they’d enforce a monoculture over irrelevant minorities… like the entirety of Tibet. Their defense of this amounted to ‘we’re already doing it, shut the fuck up.’

      • mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        25 days ago

        My guy, there’s no irony in this headline. That’s the blunt official position of the Chinese government. Is it even exaggerated? Do you think satire is merely describing bad things?

        I can’t help trying to fix this. “China draws new twenty-dash line around picture of globe.” “China denounces western map borders for implying its authority has limits.” “China renews claim to traditional imperial territory of Kansas.” It’s a PUNCHLINE, god dammit! There has to be a surprising contradiction, beyond the innate stupidity of the truth!

        This is a problem for nine out of ten headlines, from your site. Every thread has people going ‘I almost ate it!’ as if that red flag is the goal. It’s like isGlitch rose from its shallow grave, pun intended, to confidently whiff on easy targets week after week. The headline is the part that matters the most - to where a good one doesn’t even need an article - and this is the first response where you’ve broken the kayfabe of laughing off criticism.

        What is this site for? Is it just farming ad revenue? That’s the vibe of saying ‘well the thumbnail got your attention.’ Clickbait is not derision, it’s spam. Are you actually the isGlitch guy, still waiting to go ‘ah-HA, it was an LLM all along!’? If you are genuinely trying to say something, to write comedy, to ridicule and denounce the horrors - you desperately need to focus your effort on first impressions.