If you are actually trying to understand my argument here:
I am not saying the article is outdated, I am saying that the article itself has the PBO saying that the main estimates became outdated when Carney announced the defense spending increases. This is why the sentence you picked actually means the exact opposite of what you were trying to claim it means.
That is textbook mis-/dis-information on your part.
If you are actually trying to understand my argument here:
I am not saying the article is outdated, I am saying that the article itself has the PBO saying that the main estimates became outdated when Carney announced the defense spending increases. This is why the sentence you picked actually means the exact opposite of what you were trying to claim it means.
That is textbook mis-/dis-information on your part.
@otter@lemmy.ca if it is “uncivil” to call out deliberate attempts at misinformation, then why have a rule against misinformation?