Gotcha. So you are ignorant of why people are commenting.
The OP was talking about seeing 50% scam crypto ads. Our responses were to provide a comparison. Not to say that it doesn't happen, but that 50% scam crypto ads are not the norm for everyone. It's helpful to have that comparison when providing anecdotal information.
No one is saying those ads don't happen, only that it's probably not normal.
Next time, instead of being unnecessarily antagonistic, admit to being ignorant and ask.
I am simply asking what is the point of the response to my comment. Ads of all degree exist but these scams do exist in a pretty large % of the ads shown but perhaps much lower dollar value since they get shown to profiles without a tangible viewer model.
Next time, instead of using inflammatory language please just slow down and reread or have a more thoughtful discussion. Thanks.
You were ignorant (fact) and unecessarily antagonistic (fact).
I corrected you.
> You were confused and I pointed out that
I wasn't, and claiming I was is a lie.
> I am simply asking what is the point of the response to my comment.
Yes, you were ignorant. You didn't know somehting. Ignorance isn't an insult. It's a lack of knowledge.
> instead of using inflammatory language
Take our own advice.
The ads are get rich quick, unregulated powders, crypto etc.
So again I am not even sure what you are arguing about or why you use such nasty language but read what I keep saying and relax.