What stats? You didn't provide any. And I was repeating your claim about merging on a highway. You said it was the only real issue. What the fuck is going on?
The information given to the reporters was confidential information. I don't know how to tell you this other than that confidential information held by the government is a state secret. There's no actual term "state secret". There's just public and non-public information and various tiers within that framework.
I mean, technically he didn't shut the door on the fight. He says he'd still be up for it if Elon ever gets serious, but he just isn't going to waste any more time on it. Zuckerberg just doesn't want a protracted will-they/won't-they which is Elon's bread and butter. Elon is the "master" of promising things and then never delivering, but never admitting it won't happen either.
I feel like you just like hearing yourself talk because you clearly ignored almost everything I said. If you're going to act like a brick wall, there's no point in discussion until you even come close to remotely acknowledging any of my points let alone refuting them. I get you took a film class. It doesn't make you an auteur.
Even if sharing a link, most posters provide context. Putting a link with no context won't get folks to follow. And I have no image preview on my browser it seems, so assuming one will pop up isn't a good thought. I have no clue who the International Flavors and Fragrances are. A summary helps because I'm not on a quest to do research. I'm browsing the fediverse. I at least care enough about unions to stop for a moment when I see something, but theres zero information in the post. Like it asks for folks to solicit donations, but if this is an example of doing so, it's a piss poor job.
I don't know what you expect to accomplish with this. If you want to make an argument by example, be prepared to make it exhaustive, otherwise it's simply anecdotal. Anecdotes does not an argument make.
My point is that this is a very subjective realm. You can know all you want about technique and still make a bad movie. And someone who knows nothing can still make a good movie. The odds don't work in their favor, sure, but it's possible. Technique just helps, but it's neither a requirement nor a guarantee. And part of determining whether a film is done well is knowing the film's purpose and theme. Cult classics exist for a reason. They aren't "bad." They're just not popular with folks who didn't get it. You will always be colored by your biases. You can not like a film but that doesn't mean it was unnecessary. You aren't an authority as much as you want to pretend to the throne.
I don't understand why people keep comparing one instance of Lemmy to reddit? I think it's missing the point. You can still make a plea to the instance admins, but it's still their choice. Just as you have plenty of other instances to join.
You can have a good movie with poor elements and a poor movie with great elements. I'd even argue you can have a good movie with bad acting. Plus, it's all about the intent of the movie, as with any piece of art. Cocaine Bear had an intent. It fulfilled that intent. Claiming that art can objectively be rated is naive.
I would argue your second statement in A) assumes that a movie can objectively be rated good or bad. Plus it also seems to claim to know exactly what people want to see from a movie. Never s fan when someone seems to say, "I know better than you do what you like."
I'll agree a trailer doesn't always do a good job. But to claim a person can't tell if what they watched is good is hardly a statement a same person would make. Possibly a narcissist would say it. Or someone else full of themselves.
There is obviously technique that can be graded, but that doesn't make a movie.
Yes, I'm referring to the start of the discussion, the part where if you want to claim any context, you need to be aware of.
And two, popular and best aren't synonyms. In fact, pointing out how much better it is doest not answer the question. It answers why it's most common. Being the most common is the answer.
The literal lawsuit says otherwise. It's the first claim they wrote.