807
submitted 19 hours ago by Mandarbmax@r1b.it to c/funny@sh.itjust.works
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] lobut@lemmy.ca 9 points 13 hours ago

Yeah, I feel like if we blurred the advertiser, we could get away with this point.

[-] jaybone@lemmy.zip 7 points 13 hours ago

Does it not work to shame the advertiser?

[-] DaGeek247@fedia.io 4 points 10 hours ago

By default, it does not; the predatory nature of this particular company notwithstanding.

For an extreme example, all I have to do to give a smoker a craving for a cigarette is too mention how bad it smells. It doesn't matter that I did it in a negative context, just that I mentioned it.

For this company, a gambling company, which is known as addicting enough to ruin people, just sharing the company name is enough to cause similar affects.

For regular companies the affect is also there, just in varying degrees of strong. As a lesser example, I could give you cravings by just mentioning a specific soft drink, so long as I guess the right brand.

[-] RagingRobot@lemmy.world 8 points 13 hours ago

Is polymarket capable of shame? Is any company for that matter?

this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2026
807 points (96.5% liked)

Funny

16544 readers
1088 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS