top | item 16085337

(no title)

LV-426 | 8 years ago

> which unfortunately seems to be getting rarer and rarer on this forum.

If this isn't unnecessarily "snarky" itself, then what is it?

snarky: (of a person, words, or a mood) sharply critical; cutting; snide.

discuss

order

hungerstrike|8 years ago

That wasn't snarky because it was only mildly critical. Since it was mild, it also wasn't cutting. Lastly, it was not derogatory or mocking in an indirect way and so it was not snide either.

LV-426|8 years ago

Replying here, since the other post I replied to disappeared:

Despite the avalanche of downvotes burying my posts, not even one person can actually answer the question I asked:

The poster could have simply stopped typing after "Thank you for the explanation". He chose to unnecessarily add something more.

So, for everyone who disagrees with me: if what he said wasn't itself "snarky", what was it?

LV-426|8 years ago

I disagree. Aside from the sarcastic "buffer overflow" comment, his comment was far more snide than any of the replies he seemed to be complaining about.

Since you take a different view though, as I asked in my post, if it's not "snarky" then what was it?