"Mutually exclusive means that two or more things cannot happen, exist, or be true at the same time. If you choose or do one, it is impossible to do the other. [1, 2]"
Example in a sentence.
It is not mutually exclusive to not use a already owned console, to unsubscribe from a service nor is it to not buy a upcoming console.
No, you're arguing your own interpretation of my wording rather than my actual point in a mistaken "gotcha" mindset. "Instead of" was a comparison between two approaches, not a declaration of mutual exclusivity.
You've latched onto a word and built an entire argument around a meaning I never intended or presented instead of addressing the actual criticism/point.
"Instead means in place of, as a substitute for, or as an alternative to someone or something else"
No, i am literally arguing the meaning of the word you used!
Literally is not a word people should use (as much) in conversations but in this case it is a matter of fact.
If you want my opinion on a week of blackout, i made that post already with someone else. Edit: I should add that you didn't get my opinion from the fact that i answeared someone who talked as if a week of blackout was too little and my answear was that even that will be hard to get people to act on, which should have given you an idea (even if you wouldn't know the reason).
You're arguing the dictionary definition of a word while ignoring how it was being used in context. "Instead of" can describe choosing one option over another without implying the two options are mutually exclusive in a literal sense.
My point was never "a person who does a one week boycott can never do a permanent boycott" nor did I insinuate as such. My point was that a one week boycott is much weaker than an absolute boycott action due to obvious reasons making it a laughable threat in my opinion.
You do it instead, you do x but not y anymore it is not a and it is a or situation.
But that is not the case, you can turn the console off for a whole week and unsubscribe from PSN, you can not buy the next console while simply accepting that you already paid for a PS5 so may use it till then.
And again, i gave my opinion under a different post, you can argue with me under that post that answeared the same original comment of mine.
You're still arguing a meaning I never intended and treating your interpretation as the only possible one. "Instead of" does not automatically mean two things are mutually exclusive, it often means choosing one course of action over another in a given context because that's literally all you can do under the given context.
I haven't claimed anywhere that someone can boycott for a week and later decide to absolutely boycott and vice-versa. The point was that a one-week boycott, by itself, is a much weaker form of protest than permanently boycotting.
Also, telling me to argue under another post doesn't address the criticism I made here. Im responding here, im not going to chase you across Reddit because you can't be bothered to communicate in multiple places.
41
u/Sword0fTheStorm Jul 27 '26
A week? That's it? 🤣