Please done just put salt down without shoveling. It makes piles of slushy salt that at best are a mess, but likely will re-freeze into an uneven hazard. It’s also really hard on dog’s paws. An able bodied guy should be able to use a shovel.
I would find it a tad odd to refer to a hotdog as simply a sandwich, because we have a more precise and common word for it, but I would understand nonetheless.
Not just because of this debate, but also because when you use the ingredients separately you get weiner sandwiches and hot dog bun sandwiches.
It would be odd to call champagne wine, but still understandable. Same for calling a lava lamp an incandescent light. Actually, this would probably work for lots of genericized tradmarks, like jello, bandaid, dumpster, zamboni, kleenex, zipper, velcro, and so on.
Well, in the case when a table is empty except for the hotdog sandwich in question, I would maybe understand. But I imagine myself to be quite dumbfounded with such a naming
At this point, it’s pretty hard to find a natural opinion on hotdogs as sandwiches sunce everyone has heard of the great sandwich debate, but I don’t think it’s a big leap. I think calling a hamburger a sandwich is about as weird, for example.
I got a 9 volt battery three weeks ago for my multimeter, at home I put it aside somewhere the cats wouldn’t get at it to play with it and lose it on me.
I haven’t seen it since. I have no clue where I could have put the damned thing.
Are you a member of that movement that’s trying to segregate the realities of the left and right by convincing people that everyone who disagrees with them or has a bad opinion is faking?
Yes, it’s a person being exactly as unreasonable as the average person tends to be. You seem unwilling to admit that people can have bad opinions. So are you part of the partisan realists?
The average person knows that oil is making the world uninhabitable and still drives a car. In fact, when I go outside like you’re suggesting, there’s no more nature, I only see cars and infrastructure built for cars. So yes, the average person is this unreasonable, and going outside won’t convince me otherwise.
I agree that those are problems, and I agree that we need to invest more in public transportation, but the fact that public transportation in its current state sucks is not something I can immediately do anything about beyond voting and opting for jobs that don’t require me to physically commute. If I want to go to a friend’s house, or to a grocery store that’s too far for me to walk, I still have no choice but to drive.
I still don’t see what this has to do with me or the person you originally replied to (we’re two different people) trying to convince anyone that anyone who disagrees with them is a troll.
Well, you think the person described in the story is a troll because nobody is that unreasonable, right? You’re wrong. People really are that unreasonable. Not everyone whose words are incompatible with their actions is faking to try and trick you. Most people, like you, have some kind of made up excuse why it’s okay for them to act contrary to their own beliefs. Like the state of public transport. I’m sure the person in the story has an excuse just like yours.
No one is so totally oblivious that they refuse to change their mind about whether or not minds can be changed in the face of scientific evidence to the contrary. For that matter most people do not completely discount evidence that disagrees with their viewpoint.
I strongly disagree with your claim that anyone who tells you not to talk to someone who refuses to change their mind in the face of ample evidence is probably a troll, and that even if they’re not, they’re not worth talking to, is part of the shadow government trying to drive the left and the right apart.
For that matter I really don’t know how anyone can seriously argue for political unity now that Trump is quoting Mussolini.
The original argument was about whether people change their minds in the face of evidence. The evidence says people don’t change their minds in the face of evidence. The person you’re saying is a troll refused to change their mind in the face of evidence. You think they should have changed their mind in the face of evidence, because you believe that people don’t change their minds in the face of evidence. Correct?
I agree that most people would not change their minds in the heat of an emotional argument. I also believe that despite this it is the duty of every citizen with a brain to change their minds when presented with new evidence. I also believe that no one could miss the irony in the original post unless they were doing so intentionally.
Anyway, you were talking about driving the left and the right apart.
Partisan realists don’t want to have more disagreements with people who have different politics, they want to pretend there are no disagreements and that people with different politics don’t exist. They call anyone they disagree with a troll who’s just lying that they disagree
Okay. I’m not yet fully convinced of the existence of such people, but I can all but guarantee there aren’t any in this thread. There’s a big difference between that and saying you should stop arguing with someone who clearly isn’t interested in what you have to say.
Also, no one said trolls were lying about what they believed. Many trolls like to hide behind “I’m joking” as an excuse for believing things that are not acceptable to believe in modern society.
It’s the definition of a troll. Being disingenuous in order to upset others. If that’s not what you mean, don’t call someone a troll.
I do believe trolls exist, and in my opinion the world’s greatest troll is Ken M, who makes fun of people that were going to get upset anyway, and who never punches down. But I would rather use Hanlon’s razor in most situations.
Fucking everything is political. If you think something is too political its because your not political enough.
Your weekend is political, the 8 hour work day is political, the fucking air you breath and the pollution it is fucking political. EVERYTHING IS FUCKING POLITICAL!
Yes. First thing to mind are the copyright implications of remixing someone else’s character, and the copyright the meme creator gets to the work regardless. Is it explicitly legal to do or is it just that most creates don’t care much, what about if you try to earn profit by publishing a book of meme?
Then there are the platforms the meme it is hosted on, is it home hosted, is it hosted on a mega tech site, both of which come with a host of differing legal responsibilities and implications.
politics is reality and you just want fantasy… but if you keep reading fantasy, you’ll eventually notice something horrible about it. Spoiler alert: its politics
Damn, ok, relax… It’s like you guys are on cocaine or something and I accidentally brought up politics. I meant that Lemmy is too political to be dumb about memes. That’s it… Chill.
All the best movies are political. Star Wars, Citizen Kane, Jurassic Park, the Matrix. Nobody can name a great movie that isn’t political, because politics is what makes movies fun. If they didn’t have politics, they’d suck.
My coworkers give me shit for not working late all the time. Like, I work late when I absolutely have to or get permission to make up missed time. I refuse to stay just because lol.
At my last job, I would clock-watch like a kid in school and bolt out of there when it got to be 5. No fucking way was I staying there any longer than I had to.
Soon I’m going to be part of our safety management team, I respect this type of attitude. I don’t want all of our employees being exhausted all day, that’s dangerous. Go home, get rest, relax, come back 100% tomorrow. Any other attitude is unsustainable and irresponsible. I do appreciate the need to SOMETIMES work overtime. I’d really like to understand the positive feedback loop that’s involved with excessive overtime but that’s not my specific field of study.
The point that the meme template you’re using is sexist, as it implies that women are shallow and care about “dumb” things, like romantic movies, while men are cool and care about “smart” topics like history and politics.
I disagree. I think the point of this format is showing how we are emotional about different stuff. Most women and men are touched by different things, and this meme has been a way of saying “do you all guys also get emotional when thinking about this” often depicting absurd stuff but it’s fun when we guys find out we are the same. And the less sense it makes the funnier. If we are talking about being men it’s because it’s the most common trait between individuals in this community
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.