On the one hand I'm not gonna purity spiral and police our own people's speech over inconsequential shit, like a l'oid.
On the other hand, if I can't see any obvious pragmatic motivation behind following their stupid delusional grammar, I do tend to assume someone is either unreliably naive or unreliably weak stomached.
I do that when I use his legal name instead of calling him John Flint or whatever his real name was because that's all I've ever known him as. But I refuse to be 'consistent' with pronoun bullshit.
That's a guy, buddy.
On the one hand I'm not gonna purity spiral and police our own people's speech over inconsequential shit, like a l'oid.
On the other hand, if I can't see any obvious pragmatic motivation behind following their stupid delusional grammar, I do tend to assume someone is either unreliably naive or unreliably weak stomached.
making fun of people for being wrong is not policing.
I wasn't saying it was, just saying I'm not going further than that unless it's obviously a vagrant.
I am aware of Wu's true nature, but I am simply running with what is used in most reporting for the sake of consistency.
I do that when I use his legal name instead of calling him John Flint or whatever his real name was because that's all I've ever known him as. But I refuse to be 'consistent' with pronoun bullshit.