[wonder_er]

ooooh, not clock as 'hit' but clock as 'I would note this thing seems to be true about you, and it would lead to me thinking at least a little less of something about you."

That thing being "you operated inside of a HOA without noting the easy-to-encounter truth about how HOAs function/have functioned."

yeah, I'll update the wording in the original post.

Update: Wording updated. indeed, I value the things I said I value, I appreciate you pointing out the other common ways the word 'clock' is used. I normally don't use such loose language.

You're probably right about a walk - my co2 meter shows the current level in this room with an open window is 818 - pretty fine, but movement and sun is always nice. It's cloudy, but I was about to head away from my desk for the day anyway.

[jjulius]

Ah, fair. My apologies for assuming the meaning.

[wonder_er]

no, i think it is the right move, especially if it landed as such a provocative statement to dig around on the profile, and then THAT RESEARCH revealed such a contradictory impulse.

There are people who live like that, and the quick social shaming response is not a bad one. "you said you care about people {here}, and you are now behaving in a dehumanizing way. how interesting"

I simply used a word that means one thing to me, and I use it in spoken language often enough, but it happens to have an equally prominent alternative usage that means directly 'to hit'.

No apologies needed or received. I think apologies are useful for some mistakes, but in some cases, if it seemed like you're witnessing online bullying... I say keep on keeping on.

Me saying "i'd hit you in person if you said this" is straight-down-the-middle bullying. Me saying "I'd sadly think less of you, if you said this in person" is not bullying, IMO, so I say we're both right. how nice.

now i wanna take my frisbee for a walk in the local park but it's as bit too windy for good throwing... hm.