I think this miscommunication is more on you for taking it as an attack towards yourself when it was pretty clearly suspicious towards at&t, not you. In the future, I suggest trying to read things as charitably as possible. It will make forums a much more pleasant place if you don’t immediately assume aggression based on pretty innocuous words.
I didn’t see it as an attack. I saw it as very poor communication. “Also” would have worked way better as it would have been a “yes, and” instead of a literal “but.” I’m all about charitable readings. That’s why I didn’t attack them but pointed out their choice in wording. It was, as pointed out, snarky, not defensive.
I don’t remember that being part of the question I was answering. The question was why, not how. So the “But” seems confrontational in this context.
Is it dumb that they might have been in plain text or something close enough to it that it didn’t matter: of course. But that wasn’t the question.
Alright Mr snarky pants calm down, I was adding onto your comment not attacking it
That’s fine. In the future I’d start with “Also” instead of “But.” It completely changes the tone.
“Also” doesn’t make sense in context.
I think this miscommunication is more on you for taking it as an attack towards yourself when it was pretty clearly suspicious towards at&t, not you. In the future, I suggest trying to read things as charitably as possible. It will make forums a much more pleasant place if you don’t immediately assume aggression based on pretty innocuous words.
I didn’t see it as an attack. I saw it as very poor communication. “Also” would have worked way better as it would have been a “yes, and” instead of a literal “but.” I’m all about charitable readings. That’s why I didn’t attack them but pointed out their choice in wording. It was, as pointed out, snarky, not defensive.
Be honest. Which word actually makes sense?
Unless extra words are added to show they are disagreeing with the practice instead of my comment then “also” is the best choice.