2SP00KY4ME t1_j0yafre wrote

I don't think you appreciate how traumatizing a burglary can be. Your house is supposed to be a fundamentally safe space. The person that broke in could've slit your throat while you slept if they wanted, or killed your dog. That can seriously, seriously ruin a person's mental health.


2SP00KY4ME t1_iye49tf wrote

Guarantee you all the thought that went into it was he pulled up the names of all the different teams, spent five seconds thinking about each based on their name alone, and scratched off the ones that sounded unecessary to him. He knows he's a genius master business strategist, after all.


2SP00KY4ME t1_iqt3e6q wrote

My original comment said 'convoy' makes it sound militaristic. The dictionary definition of the word specifies militaristic associations, and can mean either civilian or military. Upon prompt, I explained the distinction that this event was civilian is an important enough one to make in the title.

I literally cannot explain this simpler to you, but at this point you're obviously laser focused on just trying to own a stranger, so I don't really feel the need to defend myself to you anymore. Hopefully you can find some better outlets for your energy. Have a good one!


2SP00KY4ME t1_iqsj20f wrote

Now you talk about making the title "unreadable", after I just specified to you the one word I want added. You're arguing against a made up person.

I know it's way easier for you to approach this like I'm an idiot calling for a complete title rework, but try actually responding to what I'm saying instead of coming up with your own strawmen and inserting them for an easier time. Again, the definition of a convoy has militaristic associations. Literally look up the definition. It can also mean either military or civilian. Thus, this title does not explicitly state that it happened to civilians. These are facts. You just have to deal with them.

That these were civilians is an absolutely integral part of the story and should be part of the title. The specific number of cars, the range, Russia's response are minute details, and you know that. The fact this happened to civilians is not, and you know that.

I can have a problem with the title not including one word that is completely integral to the context of the story. I know the insults are fun to throw around, but that doesn't make me illiterate, sorry.


2SP00KY4ME t1_iqpo9cn wrote

Firstly, if you actually look up the definition, it explicitly includes the phrase 'typically accompanied by armed troops or warships.' So.

Secondly, convoy can mean either. It can be civilians OR military. It's not a proper reflection of the news event, because a bunch of soldiers vs a group of civilians being massacred are totally different events. So even if you ignored the literal definition being soldiery, it's like calling a school shooting a 'building shooting'. Everyone knows that a double digit percent of people only read headlines, things like that should be explicit.


2SP00KY4ME t1_iqpkdks wrote

The point is they should explicitly use the word 'civilian'. The distinction that these were completely innocent victims is a central enough part of the story to have been part of the title.

Just calling it a 'convoy' is to say the distinction isn't worth adding to the headline. It's like calling a school shooting a 'building shooting' or a torture chamber a 'detainment camp'. The shockingness of the event is not being reflected in the word choice.

And don't say this isn't shocking anymore. It may not be surprising or unexpected that the Russian military is so openly massacring civilians, but it is still as real as the first time they did it.