Okay, but it kind of sounds like you want to nanny-state the writer's language.

Their conclusion seems like an absolutely fair interpretation of what they saw, and it also strikes me as dangerous -- perhaps more dangerous -- to suggest "writer genuinely believes, or doesn't believe, a thing, but they should say it differently from their own interpretation because..people are dumb?" Something like that.

▲

jdiff 3 days ago | parent [-]

One person is not a nation.

▲

jrm4 3 days ago | parent [-]

It's a metaphor.

	▲	jdiff 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		What kind of metaphor? You can be a metaphorical nanny state of something smaller like a household or comment section, I suppose, but even then not with a single statement. The problem with a nanny state is the scope. And people expressing contrary opinions isn't nannying.