4 ms·

I also did err by making a blanket statement "no one price matches for protein bars", so GP was right to call it out. I do understand and see that there are ca

I also did err by making a blanket statement "no one price matches for protein bars", so GP was right to call it out. I do understand and see that there are cases in which one's time preference could be such that it is sensible or necessary to price-match at that granularity even when buying a single unit. However even then there's still other constraints such as cost of transportation & reputation of vendor. Even today you can often find protein bars or name-brand supplements on Amazon for a slightly lower price (including shipping) than supermarkets, but that comes with the risk of adulterated, expired, or tampered products that not everyone will accept for the sake of slightly lower prices.

threethirtytwo 8mo ago
>I also did err by making a blanket statement "no one price matches for protein bars", so GP was right to call it out. This was clearly an error. GP is right to call it out, but not right to characterize it as nuts. It's obvious what you meant.
- jahsome 8mo ago
  It's not that "nuts" to take the literal meaning of people's own words. Calling it "obvious" someone meant something rather than what they actually typed with their own fingers is pretty nuts though. It might be common for folks to misspeak (mistype), but that by no stretch of the imagination makes their actual meaning obvious. It's quite literally the opposite...
  - threethirtytwo 8mo ago
    So you’re saying I’m nuts? Do you go to peoples faces and say that? You’re not nuts. But you are trying to twist the logic to justify your own situation. The correct word to characterize this is “manipulative”. Clearly, no one is nuts on this thread but some people are just dicks. It’s completely normal for people to not be literal, and to also mistakenly say something.
    - jahsome 8mo ago
      I didn't say you are nuts, I said your statement is. The distinction should be "obvious" no? Here's a hint though: normal is a myth.
      - threethirtytwo 8mo ago
        [flagged]
        Tadpole9181 8mo ago
        > you're a liar... a dick Oh, I have a perfect response for this! "Let me put it this way, would you say what you said to someones face? Your best friend? You mother? or father and call them a liar and a dick because they said something that was off? Would you go on some holier than thou lecture on intent and deception? You would?" They clearly weren't calling you nuts, for what it's worth. Saying something you said is nuts is not the literal saying "the person who said this is clinically insane and should be locked up". Legitimate question, I don't mean to be insensitive, but are you not a native English speaker or something?
        threethirtytwo 8mo ago
        >Calling it "obvious" someone meant something rather than what they actually typed with their own fingers is pretty nuts though. The above is what he said in response to me defending someone and saying that they are not "nuts". I am the person who called it "obvious". The colloquial meaning changes in context. Under normal conditions you're correct, it's a benign statement, that's slightly derogatory. But I changed the context. I emphasized the minor derogatoriness of making that statement and I said the person you said that to is not in actuality "nuts". Then he proceeded to call me (aka my statements) "nuts". Look I don't know if you're trolling, but you're utterly wrong. It was a targeted statement. It's clear what was said, there is just something wrong with how YOU are interpreting it. I am a native english speaker.
        8mo ago

threethirtytwo 8mo ago

>I also did err by making a blanket statement "no one price matches for protein bars", so GP was right to call it out. This was clearly an error. GP is right to call it out, but not right to characterize it as nuts. It's obvious what you meant.

jahsome 8mo ago
It's not that "nuts" to take the literal meaning of people's own words. Calling it "obvious" someone meant something rather than what they actually typed with their own fingers is pretty nuts though. It might be common for folks to misspeak (mistype), but that by no stretch of the imagination makes their actual meaning obvious. It's quite literally the opposite...
- threethirtytwo 8mo ago
  So you’re saying I’m nuts? Do you go to peoples faces and say that? You’re not nuts. But you are trying to twist the logic to justify your own situation. The correct word to characterize this is “manipulative”. Clearly, no one is nuts on this thread but some people are just dicks. It’s completely normal for people to not be literal, and to also mistakenly say something.
  - jahsome 8mo ago
    I didn't say you are nuts, I said your statement is. The distinction should be "obvious" no? Here's a hint though: normal is a myth.
    - threethirtytwo 8mo ago
      [flagged]
      - Tadpole9181 8mo ago
        > you're a liar... a dick Oh, I have a perfect response for this! "Let me put it this way, would you say what you said to someones face? Your best friend? You mother? or father and call them a liar and a dick because they said something that was off? Would you go on some holier than thou lecture on intent and deception? You would?" They clearly weren't calling you nuts, for what it's worth. Saying something you said is nuts is not the literal saying "the person who said this is clinically insane and should be locked up". Legitimate question, I don't mean to be insensitive, but are you not a native English speaker or something?
        threethirtytwo 8mo ago
        >Calling it "obvious" someone meant something rather than what they actually typed with their own fingers is pretty nuts though. The above is what he said in response to me defending someone and saying that they are not "nuts". I am the person who called it "obvious". The colloquial meaning changes in context. Under normal conditions you're correct, it's a benign statement, that's slightly derogatory. But I changed the context. I emphasized the minor derogatoriness of making that statement and I said the person you said that to is not in actuality "nuts". Then he proceeded to call me (aka my statements) "nuts". Look I don't know if you're trolling, but you're utterly wrong. It was a targeted statement. It's clear what was said, there is just something wrong with how YOU are interpreting it. I am a native english speaker.
        8mo ago