• VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Expressing the number of people shot as a tiny fraction of 400 million people would raise at least as many questions about accuracy and make it EASIER for people like you to distract from the point by obsessing over an unimportant (to the point being made) detail.

    Analogies and third decimal-accurate statistics just don’t fit together.

    • OmegaMouse@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m not quite sure what you mean by ‘people like me’. To be 100% clear, I agree with the point of the post but I just don’t think they’ve gone about explaining it in the best way. To somewhat agree with what you’re saying, I’d say yes, analogies and accurate statistics don’t fit well together, but neither do analogies and statistics in general. Either stick to written analogies/hyperbole OR use actual statistics.

      • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m not quite sure what you mean by ‘people like me’

        Pedants, the easily sidetracked, those who will jump at the opportunity to distract from the message itself by hyperfocusing on an insignificant technical detail.

        Take your pick.

        • OmegaMouse@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          You seem to have a very binary view of things though. Is it not possible for someone to agree with a message, but think we can improve on how we tell it? If we want to convince people of something, is it not best to provide as convincing an argument as possible? I’m not trying to distract from the message, I’m wondering how we can tell it better.

          • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            You seem to have a very binary view

            Of distracting from the actual topic by needlessly fixating on an only tangentially relevant detail? Yeah, I’m kooky like that.

            Is it not possible for someone to agree with a message, but think we can improve on how we tell it?

            Sure, but that’s not what you’re doing. You’re, deliberately or not, pulling all attention away from the message by demanding a fix to something that, in the specific case, is unimportant.

            If we want to convince people of something, is it not best to provide as convincing an argument as possible?

            As I said before, being more exact would invite MORE distracting arguments about it, not fewer.

            I’m not trying to distract from the message

            You’re also not trying to NOT distract from the message either, though. Or you are and you’re doing a piss-poor job of it.

            I’m wondering how we can tell it better

            It was told just fine. You’re actively obscuring the salient point with your pedantry.