Yesterday, I (sort of) learned the phrase “implication arrows,” from which I learned that I should assume that this story is not true, though the arrows… Imply that it’s true. I still don’t really get it.
Anyway, I’ve never held a job where the employer would do more than the bare minimum required by law if I disappeared. Certainly not so much as contacting my family unless there were extenuating circumstances like me verifiably disappearing mid shift. I suspect this is true for most people.
it’s referencing a quite old meme of “>implying implications”, being that the storytelling style of greentext is wildly unconventional in that it is structured around quoting / citing some external imagery or context, and thereby inviting the reader to infer what the poster is thinking instead of directly stating it
Yesterday, I (sort of) learned the phrase “implication arrows,” from which I learned that I should assume that this story is not true, though the arrows… Imply that it’s true. I still don’t really get it.
Anyway, I’ve never held a job where the employer would do more than the bare minimum required by law if I disappeared. Certainly not so much as contacting my family unless there were extenuating circumstances like me verifiably disappearing mid shift. I suspect this is true for most people.
I’ve always been skeptical of greentext (and most internet) stories, it’s just more fun to suspend one’s disbelief.
I’m just still confused about the concept of “implication arrows,” heh.
it’s referencing a quite old meme of “>implying implications”, being that the storytelling style of greentext is wildly unconventional in that it is structured around quoting / citing some external imagery or context, and thereby inviting the reader to infer what the poster is thinking instead of directly stating it
Well, thank you for the information.