• n3m37h@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      but the article didn’t mention any redeeming values for the device as you did

      This means the writer has a bias of negativity towards the device and now you are arguing that’s it’s a good thing it is being banned.

      You would vote to ban dihydrogen monoxide if you found it has been consumed by every murderer in existence and also has been found at every school shooting too

      • BossDj@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        I said “this is a dumbfuck response to a problem they allege to be fixing and hopefully their committee concludes the same”.

        Translation = it’s stupid to ban it.

        I was giving credit to that other guy for listing some redeeming qualities of the device as the article did not.