4 ms·

No, it is the name of Subway's trademark(pending?) sandwich. Logic has no place in this conversation.

Dylan16807 6y ago
Are you telling me it's a coincidence or are you doing a bit? If you're making fun of the idea, I still don't get it, because it's not like subway was trying to make them not be 12 inches.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  I am accurately describing Subway's legal position when challenged on the length of their footlong sandwiches. A legalese definition of footlong.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    It's blatantly not Subway's actual position, though. When did they make that claim, since it's not in either of the linked articles as far as I can tell?
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      https://nypost.com/2013/01/19/subway-explains-shortness-of-their-footlong-sandwiches-its-just-the-name-of-the-sub/ https://nypost.com/2013/01/19/subway-explains-shortness-of-t...
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        A facebook post. I see. And that was immediately followed up by a sentence talking very reasonably about slight loaf-to-loaf variation, which is the real argument being made there and elsewhere and in court.
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        The actual lawsuit never went to court, they settled and then the settlement was overturned, and my claim was just that this definition was part of the reason the suit didn't work. What more are you expecting out of this?
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        A judge ruled on it, so there were definitely things being said in court. > What more are you expecting out of this? I expect that "legal position" means something put out by a lawyer, not a facebook post. I expect that the actions the company takes and the things their lawyers say take precedence over a facebook post. I expect that if it's presented as an important reason subway gives then it shouldn't be taken out of context.
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        >judge ruled on it, so there were definitely things being said in court The judge ruled on the settlement, nor the actual merits of the case. I only called it their legal argument as you did not understand what I was saying, I probably could have worded that better. It was their stated position on the issue, and is very similar to the "fully self driving" being discussed. I am done with this, if you want to think I oversold Subway's claim, I disagree but fine.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        > It was their stated position on the issue, and is very similar to the "fully self driving" being discussed. I think if people were pulling "fully self driving" out of some random facebook post that discusses the capabilities in the next sentence, then the complaint would be something to sigh at and ignore.

Are you telling me it's a coincidence or are you doing a bit? If you're making fun of the idea, I still don't get it, because it's not like subway was trying to make them not be 12 inches.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
I am accurately describing Subway's legal position when challenged on the length of their footlong sandwiches. A legalese definition of footlong.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  It's blatantly not Subway's actual position, though. When did they make that claim, since it's not in either of the linked articles as far as I can tell?
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    https://nypost.com/2013/01/19/subway-explains-shortness-of-their-footlong-sandwiches-its-just-the-name-of-the-sub/ https://nypost.com/2013/01/19/subway-explains-shortness-of-t...
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      A facebook post. I see. And that was immediately followed up by a sentence talking very reasonably about slight loaf-to-loaf variation, which is the real argument being made there and elsewhere and in court.
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        The actual lawsuit never went to court, they settled and then the settlement was overturned, and my claim was just that this definition was part of the reason the suit didn't work. What more are you expecting out of this?
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        A judge ruled on it, so there were definitely things being said in court. > What more are you expecting out of this? I expect that "legal position" means something put out by a lawyer, not a facebook post. I expect that the actions the company takes and the things their lawyers say take precedence over a facebook post. I expect that if it's presented as an important reason subway gives then it shouldn't be taken out of context.
        boomboomsubban 6y ago
        >judge ruled on it, so there were definitely things being said in court The judge ruled on the settlement, nor the actual merits of the case. I only called it their legal argument as you did not understand what I was saying, I probably could have worded that better. It was their stated position on the issue, and is very similar to the "fully self driving" being discussed. I am done with this, if you want to think I oversold Subway's claim, I disagree but fine.
        Dylan16807 6y ago
        > It was their stated position on the issue, and is very similar to the "fully self driving" being discussed. I think if people were pulling "fully self driving" out of some random facebook post that discusses the capabilities in the next sentence, then the complaint would be something to sigh at and ignore.