They died after being found in the basement? Because that’s what the title says.
They had to be considered both dead and alive until they were observed.
Schrödinger’s flood victim
If you want to be needlessly pedantic about a title everyone understood: no, that’s not what the title says. It says two [people are] dead after being found in flooded basements. It does not at any point say when they died – just that they were dead after being found.
More specifically, it does not ever say they were not dead before being found. If I say “Julius Caesar is dead after 9/11”, it’s absolutely true; he was and has been in a state of death following the 9/11 attacks.
If you want to play pedant, don’t assume you’re playing alone.
“Two found dead in flooded basements”
Both more concise and more clear. Since you seem to dislike both pedantry and clarity.
Apparently we’re only permitted to meaningfully discuss this shit.
you dislike clarity
If you can’t read the title in the OP and immediately understand what it means, that says more about your reading comprehension than it does about how much I like clarity.
I agree your title is better – just that the original commenter is being needlessly pedantic instead of meaningfully discussing the article’s subject.
That’s mighty pedantic, my dude. I had the same thought when reading the title, that “dead after being found” does carry some implication that they were alive at the time of finding.
But according to you, thinking that the title could have been written better makes us raging assholes that need to be challenged at every turn, lest we turn this internet into some place with, god forbid, proper grammar or something…?
