Thanks for these. It’s great to have more context. I wasn’t even aware of some of these. This is exactly how you win people over and get them away from BofA.

In this hypothetical case, no decision was made to learn or not learn about the pros or cons of BoA. Since no decision was made either way, I would be ambivalent and ignorant, but not willfully ignorant.

If someone told me about how shitty BoA was and I made the decision to ignore them or tell them I didn’t want to hear it, that’s willful ignorance because I’m making a decision not to learn more and I want to remain ignorant on purpose.

Can we fucking stop with the semantics already?

You seem swell. And exactly like someone I want to listen to and learn from. /s

I agree with you. BoA is shit and I won’t bank with them. But your victim blaming is not the way to convince people to move away.

But don’t listen to me. Keep assuming the worst in people that don’t think the same way you do. I wish you well.

More flies with honey, man.

It’s not willful ignorance. If I have to go out of my way to look up past news articles or follow financial news in general to not be ignorant, and in contrast I’m being shown BoA ads on billboards, buses, mail ads, tv ads, etc without my interest or opting in, I’m not going to learn the truth - unless I look for it.

In this case, I’m passively ignorant. I’m not trying to bury my head in the sand, it’s just those telling the for and against stories about BoA are not equal in size nor scope.

Please stop blaming the victims, and expecting people to think the same way you do.