A Delaware animal shelter is working to find new homes for thousands of chicks that were left abandoned in a U.S. Postal Service truck for three days.
Delaware’s Department of Agriculture said it received a call earlier this month from USPS saying the Postal Service had an “undeliverable box of baby birds.” About 12,000 chicks had been shipped from the Pennsylvania-based Freedom Ranger Hatchery to farms across the country.
State agricultural officials say that when they found the chicks at a USPS distribution center in Delaware, around 4,000 were dead.
No. I’m downvoting for other reasons like the comment coming out of the left field and being smug. I absolutely agree with it but bruh, obviously in a utopian world things would be perfect. Pointing out the obvious to explain what could be avoided feels condescending.
You can’t have smugness in such a short and concise comment. I jave no idea what intention was in the writer’s mind and neither do you.
Left field? This situation is a direct result of the animal products industry. Sure this comment is looking at the bigger picture, but it is very much on topic.
And you know what? even if it was smug, while not the best way to make a point, i think that when your point is valid the smugness is negligible.
You absolutely can have smugness even with a single word given the context, and Lemmy and society at large have provided plenty of context in the form of a questionable activism and social trends & attitudes and drama. Given this, I can deduce some things, it’s not so out of reach.
And besides, arguing my opinions on why I downvoted someone doesn’t seem as important to me as addressing the extremely inaccurate take by the other guy.
I wish that were true. I can’t count the times people have ignored reason because I was slightly smug to someone in that same sentence 😅
What extreme inaccuracy?
Their weird rationalization for why people are downvoting the vegan comment. I agree with its sentiment but not its delivery is my point, as a counter example to their reasoning bias.
I personally don’t think that there is enough text in that comment to accurately decide if it was smug or not, but even if you believe that it was smug, I’m not gonna tell you you’re wrong, but if you agree that the point is correct and you’re only downvoting it because of how it was worded, I think you’re doing more damage to the Lemmy community than you’re doing good, since even if it is a smug comment it is not overtly smug, it is not disrespectful, and the point is valid and very important considering that animal lives are already overlooked and undervalued.
Yeah, and it’s tied to what I said earlier. There was some thought behind it lol
Let’s not. I sincerely did not vote either way because I also agree with the sentiment, but I commented as if I had (down) voted because of the friction it creates in my mind. We don’t need to go around arbitrarily assigning blame.
100% your reading of it and just confirming the previous comment
could be the shittiest world and we still wouldn’t need to eat animals
Well of course it’s a reading given the social context and the overall discourse on Lemmy. It does not exist in a vacuum. And that does not confirm any previous comment, what does that even mean. Lol
I’m not arguing that