• _cryptagion [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 hours ago

    GOG Has Had To Hire Private Investigators To Track Down IP Rights Holders

    that’s not exaggerating anything. it’s merely saying it has happened at least once before.

    • slimerancher@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Okay, so grammatically, in perfect tense we can use plural to mention a thing that has happened at least (or exactly) once? Wouldn’t using a plural imply multiple, when the known fact is singular?

      • Caveman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 hours ago

        It’s a fair point but it’s not as egregious as most other headlines. I personally give this one a pass since clickbaits are meta in the article space. It shows that GOG has this in their toolbox.

      • _cryptagion [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        22 hours ago

        Is implying plurality exaggerating things to begin with in this context? The headline is pretty vague, it doesn’t overtly exaggerate. It makes a pretty simple statement without embellishing anything.

        But if we’re going to get into the weeds, we don’t know how many private investigators work at whatever agency they hired, or how many were involved in tracking this person down.

        • slimerancher@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          It did feel like exaggeration to me, but it could be my bias. May feel differently about it later.

          You are right about the fact that it could be an agency. Maybe I was just being pedantic 😀

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            Eh, when someone says “private investigator,” I subconsciously assume there could be a group involved, and not one person. If I hire a tax preparer, there are probably multiple people involved (the person preparing the tax docs, the accountants auditing those docs, people auditing their software, etc).

            If someone says “private investigators,” I assume they contacted multiple agencies, perhaps on multiple occasions.

          • _cryptagion [he/him]@anarchist.nexus
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            21 hours ago

            I mean, we’re all being pedantic, aren’t we? honestly, I don’t even know why we wasted the time we have on this lmao. for me it’s probably because I’m working and bored to death.

      • slazer2au@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Not really. It could be they hired several for this one case.

        If a person is off the grid in Yorkshire, you wouldn’t get someone from London to go up to do something.

      • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        That is simply a generic way of referring to the concept of private investigators, as I’ve also just done in this sentence.

      • Anomnomnomaly@lemmy.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        21 hours ago

        that’s not what it means… investigator could mean a single person, investigators could mean they hired a firm to do the job and multiple people work for the firm.

        People love to look for a reason to be offended by things.