But in this case, the meaning stays the same even without the /s, because the key message is factually true and the sentence still functions as a contra to the previous comment.
It doesn’t change the intended meaning but it can change the interpreted one.
For example when I write “I love to give my data to Google /s” you can be sure that I actually do not love to give my data to Google, whereas leaving out the ‘/s’ I could have meant it sincerely (for example, because I want targeted ads, perfectly tailored to my needs).
This example clearly illustrates the totally opposite interpreted meaning.
But in the case of the comment we are discussing, disclosing the sarcasm makes no difference to either side of the conversation (the sender and the readers)
Nah, no /s needed when there are actual ample examples of enshittification via nickel and diming ads and ad-like bwhavior.
Not sure what you think “/s” means, but what it means is that the comment was sarcastic, which it was.
But in this case, the meaning stays the same even without the /s, because the key message is factually true and the sentence still functions as a contra to the previous comment.
I thnkI wrote /s, because “just cosmetic” is already a lie.
/s never changes the meaning. Its just a disclosure.
It doesn’t change the intended meaning but it can change the interpreted one.
For example when I write “I love to give my data to Google /s” you can be sure that I actually do not love to give my data to Google, whereas leaving out the ‘/s’ I could have meant it sincerely (for example, because I want targeted ads, perfectly tailored to my needs).
This example clearly illustrates the totally opposite interpreted meaning.
But in the case of the comment we are discussing, disclosing the sarcasm makes no difference to either side of the conversation (the sender and the readers)