4 ms·

I don't think your reasoning in the second paragraph is accurate. People aren't a uniform congealed mass of preferences that match your own. You don't like coo

by ABCLAW 9y ago

I don't think your reasoning in the second paragraph is accurate. People aren't a uniform congealed mass of preferences that match your own. You don't like cooking. I do. It is really fun for me. I enjoy cooking new things and learning new techniques. I enjoy learning new ingredients and new dishes. I, however, hate going grocery shopping and looking up new recipes. This service deals with the issues I have. What's even better? It's quality shared time between me and my girlfriend. She'll deal with some of the steps. I'll deal with others. In total, we put in maybe 15 minutes of work, and wait another 15 minutes before the dish is done. Generally this is faster and less effort than going out to eat for the quality of food received. At the end of it all, we have a delicious meal we both put together, and more knowledge about how to cook in general, which we both enjoy. Hence why these food services are great in my household, and terrible in yours. We're attempting to solve different problems. I want to cook in a hassle free manner. You want to eat in a hassle free manner. They aren't the same thing.

Mz 9y ago
People aren't a uniform congealed mass of preferences that match your own. Generally speaking, when people make generalizations, they are not assuming that 100% of the world will exactly fit their statements 100% of the time. Saying that it is generally true does not presume that people like you do not exist. It just presumes that you are probably in the minority.
- ABCLAW 9y ago
  Sure, but if you do that, then your following statement doesn't actually hold true. >If people wanted to, you know, tweak it themselves, then there would be no food services of any kind, not restaurants and not take out food and not meal-in-a-box delivery services. Turn that statement into one about a minority's preference, and suddenly you discover an underserved market that likes preparing their own food. Kind of like the poster you replied to was stating. Kind of like everyone in the thread that has a different problem than you did that this service is a solid solution for. Edit: I won't extend this comment chain any further. Please look at the comment I critiqued. I think you've glossed over your own statement.
  - Mz 9y ago
    I didn't write the article with the headline about how this market is facing a "slow-motion trainwreck." I merely gave my opinion as to why this is an inherently difficult problem space. That's it. It is pretty ridiculous for you to act like I think there is zero market because I wouldn't buy it. That amounts to twisting my comments in a way that makes it very hard to engage in good faith.
    - Smaug123 9y ago
      You did say you think there should be zero market, whether or not you intended for that to be something you said. Specifically, you said that restaurants should fill the gap served by meal-in-a-box services entirely. The interpretations in this thread have been reasonable. (No point arguing this with me; I'm looking at it from the outside, some hours later than it happened, and won't reply to this comment.) > If you can afford a meal-in-a-box service, why would you not just go to a restaurant where the wait staff will do a decent job as a substitute for your own live-in cook previously known as The Wife?

by ABCLAW 9y ago

Mz 9y ago

People aren't a uniform congealed mass of preferences that match your own. Generally speaking, when people make generalizations, they are not assuming that 100% of the world will exactly fit their statements 100% of the time. Saying that it is generally true does not presume that people like you do not exist. It just presumes that you are probably in the minority.

ABCLAW 9y ago
Sure, but if you do that, then your following statement doesn't actually hold true. >If people wanted to, you know, tweak it themselves, then there would be no food services of any kind, not restaurants and not take out food and not meal-in-a-box delivery services. Turn that statement into one about a minority's preference, and suddenly you discover an underserved market that likes preparing their own food. Kind of like the poster you replied to was stating. Kind of like everyone in the thread that has a different problem than you did that this service is a solid solution for. Edit: I won't extend this comment chain any further. Please look at the comment I critiqued. I think you've glossed over your own statement.
- Mz 9y ago
  I didn't write the article with the headline about how this market is facing a "slow-motion trainwreck." I merely gave my opinion as to why this is an inherently difficult problem space. That's it. It is pretty ridiculous for you to act like I think there is zero market because I wouldn't buy it. That amounts to twisting my comments in a way that makes it very hard to engage in good faith.
  - Smaug123 9y ago
    You did say you think there should be zero market, whether or not you intended for that to be something you said. Specifically, you said that restaurants should fill the gap served by meal-in-a-box services entirely. The interpretations in this thread have been reasonable. (No point arguing this with me; I'm looking at it from the outside, some hours later than it happened, and won't reply to this comment.) > If you can afford a meal-in-a-box service, why would you not just go to a restaurant where the wait staff will do a decent job as a substitute for your own live-in cook previously known as The Wife?