The lexicographer’s role is to explain how words are (or have been) actually used, not how some may feel that they should be used
You interpreted this to mean that “how [you] may feel that they should be used” is more correct than “how words are (or have been) actually used.” That’s on you, dude.
Just because you can’t be mollified or persuaded doesn’t mean you’re correct; otherwise maga would be the champions of debate.
You’re the authority on what you meant, not on what you said. You can’t tell me to reject the evidence of my eyes.
Either way, it doesn’t matter, because you’re not the authority on the English language, words have meanings, and your definition of diet was simply wrong. Just because it means something different to you doesn’t mean the whole world has to bend itself around your delusions.
Veganism is a diet. Whether or not it’s also a philosophy doesn’t change that.
this is a strawman. prima facie bad faith
Not at all.
You interpreted this to mean that “how [you] may feel that they should be used” is more correct than “how words are (or have been) actually used.” That’s on you, dude.
Just because you can’t be mollified or persuaded doesn’t mean you’re correct; otherwise maga would be the champions of debate.
no. I didn’t.
That’s exactly what happened, and any other explanation renders that quote irrelevant to the discussion.
I’m the authority on how I inerpreted it. you’re simply wrong
You’re the authority on what you meant, not on what you said. You can’t tell me to reject the evidence of my eyes.
Either way, it doesn’t matter, because you’re not the authority on the English language, words have meanings, and your definition of diet was simply wrong. Just because it means something different to you doesn’t mean the whole world has to bend itself around your delusions.
Veganism is a diet. Whether or not it’s also a philosophy doesn’t change that.
just saying things doesn’t make them true.
Funny enough, that debunks your argument rather than mine.
I’ve made an argument just as strong as yours.