Post #4507183

2026-08-09 00:06 UTC

I disagree. Twice as short would be half the length if you asked me (same as twice as long, in a glass half empty, half full situation). In a similar but different example, if you have a 1000 word essay and you cut it to 500 words, you could make it twice as short again by cutting it to 250 words.

Replies (2)

@daychilde@lemmy.world 2026-08-09 03:21

Language is generally workable if it communicates the intended message. In that sense, I acknowledge that it is generally understood what something means, but not always. However, it is semantic gibberish, and fuck anyone who supports that gibberish. But yes, it’s fine enough in the same way that when someone says “could of” we know they meant “could’ve” or “could have”. It doesn’t make it correct. And it is still grating. Two asshats disagreed with my comment above enough to downvote. This is also grating because it means they actively support WRONG. And it is WRONG. It’s fine, but it is irritating when people are willfully ignorant.

Open ##4507182
@Wrufieotnak@feddit.org 2026-08-09 05:02

That’s because you wrote something different than the other comment. Twice as short != twice shorter And the second version is just wrong.

Open ##4508750