Post #4487119
2026-08-10 08:56 UTC
@adamsteer@mapstodon.space @en3py@onlyarts.social @aj@gts.sadauskas.id.au
No, "not responding" IS NOT the same as "refusing" or "declining" to respond, for the reasons I gave and will not repeat. Saying it's so without offering any counterargument does not make it so.
While the situation being discussed is "maritime", this has nothing to do with maritime obligations. It could just as well be an SMSed request to pick someone up at the bus stop.
Unless the Meta vessel did in fact receive the Coast Guard request (which according to the article they say they did not) and then chose to ignore said request (a moot point if they never got it), there is no justification for using loaded terms like "refused" and "declined".
... however much we may want this to be further evidence of Zuckerberg's lack of character or whatever. Bias is bias.
If people want to say "They're lying! They did get the request!" then that's a different discussion.
Replies (1)
-
@en3py@onlyarts.social 2026-08-10 09:25
@kauer@aus.social @adamsteer@mapstodon.space @aj@gts.sadauskas.id.au I may agree to have some (lots) of bias towards the individual, and based on the lack of official sources (no, I did not lookup because I trust the sources I follow to do that) I can say that he is not the only (ir)responsible in this case: I don't believe he is the captain of the vessel, which should add another one to the list. The semantics looks feels exactly se same way they behave in court or in front of congress: words over actions. Just saying.