You're viewing part of a thread.
Yeah. The presence of shit shows they're not washed.
Unwashed eggs don't need refrigeration.
No-one else thought I was claiming shit has protective properties, so perhaps you should consider that you might be mistaken in who has expressed what incorrectly.
It isn't my fault that your literary skills aren't as good as your chicken farming skills.
Okay imagine you and a good friend often get to go cruising in your mom's car when she's not using it. One day you tell them, "Mom's gonna be home all weekend, that's why we can go to the party we didn't have a ride to".
But huh. Wait a minute? How does your mom staying at home mean you suddenly get to go somewhere? Huh? Your friend would definitely be mighty confused and ask you to try expressing your thoughts more clearly, wouldn't they? Right? Becsuse how on Earth would your mom sitting on a sofa mean your travel problem is gone? She's sitting. Still. At home. How is it relevant?
Edit autocorrect mistakes
Stop.
Use English correctly or don't, I don't care.
There's no need to be ashamed just because you didn't know something as simple as what an implication is.
I'm sure you can figure out that "might be mistakenly in.." is obviously the phone's autocorrect correcting an adjective to an adverb. Same with "would" to "wouldn't."
You could've just avoided answering, but felt some sort of compulsion to, because you don't like that I pointed out a mistake you made. It's very understandable, I remember feeling the same occasionally as a teen.
However it is a bit ironic that you would try to pretend that I'm the less literate one when you didn't know what an implication is.
You added good information to the thread, like the part I was referring to being called "the bloom". Thanks fo4 that. But no-one thought I was saying eating shit is healthy, I'm sure.
The implication is that you think chicken shit protects eggs. That is what your words said, that is what they implicate.
You can argue what you meant until the stars die. It doesn't change anything.
No, that's what you inferred from them, incorrectly.
You can argue what you meant until the stars die. It doesn't change anything.
Exactly. Everyone here knows what I meant, except you, who wanted to boast with their chicken expertise, so you had to pretend as if I had meant that excrement is protective. And it would be exceedingly hilariously of you to tell me what I meant with my words.
We all know how strong a disgust reflex shit causes. We know it's not healthy to eat it. Thats why — for the the majority of us — that can be left as an implication.
You can pretend until the stats side indeed. You'll still be wrong.
You can pretend until the stats side indeed.
Got it buddy, you definitely know English better than I do. Continue on, definitely speaking English clearly and correctly.
Are you pretending you don't understand that autocorrect obviously changed "stars die" to "stats side", when I'm painfully obviously copying your earlier message?
You're pretending that autocorrect mistakes have something to do with linguistic capacity?
Alright. Did you infer or imply that? ;>
I read what I write after I write it.
Unlike you, clearly, which is why you have "typos". Though, at this point, I'm genuinely convinced you're AI.
I've pointed out why you're wrong, you've decided to argue. You are wrong, every English teacher will tell you you're wrong, and anyone that can write in English correctly will tell you you're wrong.
Silence, now. Before I link you the wikipedia definition of Dunning-Kruger.
Though, at this point, I'm genuinely convinced you're AI.
Then god you're shit at detecting LLM's and attempts at insults. There's plenty of checkers you know. Go ahead and run my comments thorough them, hunny.
Yes I often comment quickly late at night and dont care to proofread. I'm not ashamed of it on Lemmy. For anything that matters I do proofread ofc.
That doesn't mean I don't have a better grasp on English than you. It just means I'm less anal.
I've pointed out why you're wrong, you've decided to argue. You are wrong, every English teacher will tell you you're wrong, and anyone that can write in English correctly will tell you you're wrong.
Not a single one will. You'd like to argue that, since you don't understand how well you're demonstrating ignorance of how "implication" and "infer" even differ.
You've inferred something which I did not imply.
https://www.scribbr.com/commonly-confused-words/infer-vs-imply/
Imply and infer are two transitive verbs that are commonly confused. Their meanings are closely related, but they shouldn’t be used interchangeably.
Imply means to express or suggest something indirectly—without explicitly stating it. Infer means to draw a conclusion from some evidence—in other words, to pick up on something that was implied.
Tip
If you struggle to differentiate between the two words, it’s useful to think of implying as an act of giving information and inferring as an act of receiving information. When you imply something and I infer something from what you said, you’re giving information to me
See mine is an implication. If I had meant the shit is protective in itself, then that would be an explicit statement, and not an implicit one.
I can't even keep count of how many "native speakers" I end up teaching English to. It's somewhat amusing.
Oh you should definitely go and open that Dunning-Kruger link. You're at the dip you'll see in the graphs, I wager. Confidently pretending you understand linguistics, when you probably slept through your English lessons.
You, neither, inferred nor implied that the chickenshit was responsible.
You explicitly stated it. I am not giving you an English lesson, you do not know what infer or imply means if you think saying "and that's why" is anything other than a direct statement.
Edit: Tagged. I'll be sure to point out how wrong you are if I see you around.
I did not.
I stated that my eggs have shit on them (implication being they're not washed) and thus they don't need to be refrigerated.
Who and above all why would reason that I am asserting that the eggs I have but can't spot visible shit on, I refrigerate? "My eggs have shit on them" isn't the same as "all my eggs are covered in shit, and for that reason, none of them need to be refrigerated".
You're arguing that a text can't have implied something if YOU didn't infer the same thing.
So when someone tells a joke and others laugh and you don't, do you tell the person who told the joke they told it wrong and everyone else is wrong to laugh and youre the one who's correct because you didn't laugh?
If I told you "your mom says hi", would you think your mom at home just happened to say the word "hi", or would you read that as me saying I'm fucking your mom? Honest answers now. :)
Well since you can't point to a single mistake I've made and don't understand the difference between "infer" and "imply", yes, I think I do have a better grasp on English than you.