Violent incidents. If you’re going to make such a big deal about accurate language, you should practice what you preach or people will think you have no credibility
Wow
2 Likes
Exactly. 
1 Like
You’re right - instead of saying it was 27.5% of the crime per his source, I should have said it was per his representation of his source. So he’s doubly wrong. Thanks for helping me catch that. 
Edit: my mistake- he said violence from the beginning. Apologies to all on that point. The number is still a lie.
Yea, amazing, right!
1 Like
My mistake was incorrectly believing your words without checking the graphic. Your “mistake” is, at this point, a deliberate misrepresentation.
1 Like
That’s not how I see it, maybe I’ve missed something. Looks like you’re busy arguing about the argument (again) and missing the point (again) and slandering your interlocutor (again).
Look here, @Poundsand
but earlier you said
So here we have caught you red handed in a lie (kinda hard to be generous and say a misunderstanding at this point). What would that make you? And since you accused someone else of lying, that would also make you a _______, would it not?
Already corrected, and apologies issued, regarding violent crime.
The number as a majority is still a lie.
3 Likes
most of the people or things in a group:
27.5% makes up the largest group.
All of this is deflecting from the actual point. It’s kind of pathetic.
1 Like
It depends on how you interpret it; what you think others mean to say isn’t necessarily what they meant to say, and if you respond by calling people liars or racists you probably won’t find a productive discussion ensues. Try asking questions instead of lobbing accusations.
I think you should start with an apology, but I sense you will either attack or deflect…
27.5% of the people in a group is not most of the people in the group. Most of the people would be non african americans.
This is not complicated math.
The largest group isn’t the automatically a majority. You’re trying to use majority the way plurality is used in politics, but the way you’re using it is never correct as far as I can figure. But as always, I’m willing to be proved wrong - show me a definition that actually supports you rather than one that shoots you down. 
2 Likes
I have no common ground on a topic with someone where they can’t admit that 27.5% of people isn’t the majority of people. Alternate facts are not facts.
2 Likes
It’s clearly the largest share, and as mentioned is the only interracial violence that is larger than intra according to the chart. You missed the point entirely and now you’re arguing about the argument and avoiding the “fact” that you were caught in a “lie” as well as the simple truth that you shouldn’t have called him a liar in the first place.
I’m not going to argue the argument with you. Be a man and apologize for your bad behaviour, acknowledge his point not your interpretation of it, and that is that.
2 Likes
I’ll be the bigger man and just use your definition to move things along.
They are the largest group. Which is a problem, especially since it’s the only racial group another commit violent crimes against at a higher percentage than intra racial violent crime.
3 Likes
And your original point that
seems to have been fully validated anyways. Not much point in continuing really. Especially if you don’t get an apology for being called a liar, IMO. Too much of that from a few specific posters, I think.
1 Like
I didn’t miss his point - that black people are responsible for the majority of violent crimes against Asian Americans. That point is wrong, wrong, wrong per his source, and he’s attempting to defend it by defining 27.5% as a majority.
And you’re defending that nonsense.
It’s also NOT clear that the largest share of crimes against asians are committed by blacks - it’s 27.5%, 24.1%, and 24.1% black, white, and asian, per that report, where 11% was unknown, and “offender race/ethnicity is based on victims’ perceptions of offenders.”
This has race bait written all over it.
3 Likes
I agree there’s no point in continuing - honestly man, what’s the point in continuing when you have to argue with someone that 27.5% isn’t a majority, and have to argue with people saying it depends on how you interpret that? That’d be like me wanting to say I didn’t say anyone lied because liars are telling the truth, it just depends how you’re interpreting it - there’s no discussion to be had when multiple posts need to occur over common (and correct) usage of common words.
1 Like
I imagine more than half for the word of majority. More than 75% for the word of most. Majority maybe can mean the largest, though. I have no idea how common it is.
and don’t forget you were caught red-handed in a lie up there, very pertinent
1 Like
Lemme put it this way - if you told people you’d give them the majority of some pot of money and only gave them 27.5% of it, something close to 100% of people would be like WTF?
The mistake I apologized for? Ok, if that’s your “interpretation” of a lie, yea, that’s why we’re having a conversation with you defending 27.5% as a valid interpretation of majority and can’t have a real conversation. 
1 Like
Yet another scam by the CCP to sow division around the world. China is crafting narrative for the world to feel that Asians are not safe around Westerners, at home and abroad. (To distract from the fact that China is holding Asians in Concentration Camps and oppressing Tibetans, Falun Gong, etc, and human trafficking North Koreans, etc) This is part of their overarching strategy to undermine democratic countries and drive their belt-road initiatives.
When real racist attacks happen against Asians in America, China will latch on to the event and amplify it, especially if there is a perfectly framed CCTV footage of the assault. (But when real racist attacks happen in China against Foreigners, it’s suppressed.) China can amplify in several ways - one way is to pay an editor to write an article about increased racism against Asians. Another way China does this is by using CCP-corrupted-Police traditionally used to trace overseas Uighurs/Tibetans, and simply have them scour a database of cases/images for ones where there might be domestic violence and re-label that case/image as hate crime, and then send the falsified report to local news. In the midst of the real racism, China will pile on several false or re-purposed events to amplify the message. Same tactics used in other countries and now there’s focus in the US. More recently China likes reaching out to Influencers in social media and paying them to say they were the victim of an attack, and “speculating” that it’s probably a hate crime.
1 Like