Shit movement is different from shit aim(, though I do have both). Wait. When did you see me in TF2?

:(

• People that actually know how to aim. (As in they know that mouse accel and changing sens won't impact long-term aim, aim trainers can help you improve raw aim, etc.)
  
• Seeing critical thinking being applied (which is rare).
  
• Seeing actually good representation of neurodiversity in media (also rare).
  
• Linux getting better.

It seems that way in this case, but this discussion got derailed the instant I said the word misconflate at no fault of my own. I rarely intend to piss off people.

1. Online classes usually cost money. A resource I don't have.
   
2. College resources are usually online these days.
   
3. There are linguistic communities online that can help with the field.

No. That's not how words are standardized (there is no universal definition of a word; the definition of 'word' is based on [1][2]).

You can't rely on common sense period. Statements deemed to be "common sense" (more accurately the majority's opinion) can be and often are wrong ([1]); in fact it is logically fallacious. For instance:

• It is "common sense" to put your phone in rice after it gets wet, since rice helps dry your phone. This is not true! [1][2], as this sort of thinking comes from confirmation bias.
  
• "People use 10% of their brain." This is a classic "common sense" myth though many more people recognize this is false. [1][2][3][4]

I do sit back and think.

How so?

I'll admit it was a mistake to state colleges were useless; they helped us get tons of information over 2 millennia that we would not have been able to get. However I feel that college is just too risky for me in a world where employment isn't guaranteed and the home rental market is getting more expensive.

I already admitted that I don't know shit about linguistics. What do you mean I "refuse to admit [my lack of knowledge]"?

Ok.

How is one defined as an "asshole" or "pretentious"? I'm not trying to be a dick here; I just need to know when someone is considered an asshole so that I can reduce that feeling I'm radiating.

It'd also be great if people would stop jumping to conclusions and stop assuming shit that is impossible to verify.

Not trolling but ok.

Well hey I didn't give a shit if misconflate was a real word prior to that argument starting up. Also there's no reason to care anyway; I carried the meaning through to you whether through the explicit word 'misconflate' or the implied definition in 'conflate'.

TF2 is likely overriding some stuff through its config.cfg file. Just make it an empty file and set read-only.

Do check your config(s) though, as it may also cause problems if script code isn't written correctly.

That post was not for confirmation bias; I just wanted more input answers from other people, because asking in one forum just feels like not enough input answers.

(Also it'd be great if you could get rid of the AMP link.)

I mean you're not wrong. I spend a lot of time on my shitty laptop.

According to merriam, it merely just states "to combine", not "to combine in error".

(What's ngram? I'm interested.)

I searched misconflate in searx (with Google and DuckDuckGo search engines enabled) and got some results containing misconflate. It's not popular, but I do get results containing it.

I'll just settle on this conclusion, since I'm getting sick of this thread: 'misconflate' (or 'misconflation') can theoretically exist as a word (since mis- and conflate are both words), but it won't be recognized as one by your metric until it's popular enough.

(How did this thread go from "is consistency always good?" to "Is misconflate a word"?)

Again. misconflate fits the rules of being a word (mis- + conflate); it's just not included in dictionaries because it isn't recognized as a word.

I'm confused. Can you elaborate?

Yes. That is how prefixes work.

Nope. I'm currently pissed off because a lobby of idiots said that mouse accel is bad for aim...

So technically misconflate is a word, because it has a practical meaning (to badly blend).

Yes. To clarify I mean that there is no unified proper definition, not that there are no definitions.

Once again: A dictionary is not what [i]defines[/i] a word; it merely [i]lists[/i] words.

...no.

Sometimes you have to specify the meaning, like in debates or journalism. Also define "bastardization" in the English language, because so long as the syntax is correct and preexisting words are used, it does not matter if the word sounds wrong or is not in the dictionary. Awkward word ≠ Invalid word.