Using a 1930s trade law, Homeland Security targeted the man—who hasn’t entered the US in more than a decade—following posts on X condemning the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.
It wasn’t snark, but mild confusion. If my response was snark, then your question prompting it could be interpreted as condescending brag. Compounded now by the seemingly absurd attempt at justification by claiming some people go through the effort of creating & providing needless non-paywall archive links just because they can. Never mind the arrogant, self-righteous tone.
I hope you can understand that at least nine times out of ten, a response like yours (instead of simply answering or ignoring the question) turns out to be from someone looking for a fight. I’m glad to find that the last sentence of my reply turned out to be warranted, at first. Lashing out really wasn’t necessary.
It wasn’t snark, but mild confusion. If my response was snark, then your question prompting it could be interpreted as condescending brag. Compounded now by the seemingly absurd attempt at justification by claiming some people go through the effort of creating & providing needless non-paywall archive links just because they can. Never mind the arrogant, self-righteous tone.
Whatever. This is pointless. Chao.
In that case, I’m sorry for misunderstanding.
I hope you can understand that at least nine times out of ten, a response like yours (instead of simply answering or ignoring the question) turns out to be from someone looking for a fight. I’m glad to find that the last sentence of my reply turned out to be warranted, at first. Lashing out really wasn’t necessary.
Fair enough. Ciao.