I'm a master debator
When I make posts on this blog, the truth of my writing is usually self-evident. When faced with such overwhelming veraciousness, however, some poor souls cannot help but feel threatened by their own (understandable) sense of inferiority and thus lash out in a feeble attempt to protect their own fragile sense of self worth. An example can be seen in the comments section of the post I made entitled “Damn Capitalism” where I reveal the scheme of the Welch’s company to save money at the consumer’s expense by reducing the amount of orange juice in each can that they sell. The comment is reproduced in its entirety for the reader’s convenience.
plummyduck said...
I feel this blogger has overestimated the savings to the Welch's company by their alleged scheme. Although the estimated juice savings is accurate, the author fails to take into account the increase in packaging on a per ounce basis. Perhaps the company has sacrificed total juice volume in order to conserve potable water. Maybe there is some sort of English/metric conversion problem. Did the blogger actually measure the fluid in the can? Did he actually take the can home and stew about it for two days before posting this article? Was the can disposed of in his general garbage, or was it recycled as it should have been? Are the Welch's people unable to purchase their raw materials from previously-recycled aluminum due to a lack of public participation? The possibilities are endless and, sadly, this author fails to take many of them into account. I hope this blogger takes more pains with his next post.
I almost decided not to dignify the ramblings of the commenter with a response, but I ultimately decided that it was my civic duty to dispel any confusion that the commenter’s words may have stirred in the unsuspecting public. Let me start by pointing out that commenter is clearly trying to mask whatever “arguments” the commenter may have behind a façade of arrogance and academic elitism in order to install a false sense of credibility. Why else, for example, would the commenter use such terms as “potable” instead of coming right out and saying “drinkable”, unless of course the commenter’s argument doesn’t hold water (potable or otherwise) and the commenter is just trying to impress people with vocabulary? This is further substantiated by the fact that the pseudonym “plummyduck” is clearly intended to illicit subconscious associations with the character from the popular board game Clue named Plum, who is a professor. Using such gimmicks is a clear indication of not only a bad argument but of a low moral integrity. I, however, am above such tricks and will attack the “arguments” themselves (however pitiful they may be) and not take the low road of pointing out that the commenter’s matriarch engages in sexual promiscuity for which she receive financial compensation.
Let us start with what appears to be the crux of the commenter’s argument, that perhaps I am to blame for not recycling. For starters, this is the type of argument that is eroding our American values. The kid is not to blame for his killing all his schoolmates in a psychotic rage. He played violent video games. Blame society. Blame his parents. Blame his victims for getting in the way of the bullets he fired. Blame the victim who was wrongly deprived of precious OJ for not recycling. Anything but hold someone accountable for personable responsibility. Whatever the current status of aluminum recycling, clearly other canned beverage providers are fully capable of providing the entire 12 fluid ounces. Why can’t Welch’s? The whole issue is made moot anyway since I could not possibly recycle the can until after I purchased and consumed the OJ at which point the transgression had already taken place. While I know of some states where you can turn in your can to get back a recycling deposit (Texas, by the way, is not one of them), I do not believe there is a single one where you can turn in your can for half an ounce of orange juice.
Lets look at some of the other points. The commenter is correct in assuming that I did not measure the volume myself, but only because I trusted the company to meet the amount of OJ they promised on the can, although I guess the mere fact that they deprive you of half an ounce already shows that such trust is probably unwarranted. The assertion that it may be a conversion error is ludicrous since Welch’s is an American company based in Concord, Ma and thus clearly uses United States Customary Units (USCU) and thus did not arrive at 11.5 instead of 12 by some conversion error. If there were any unit conversion error it would be in converting to the International System of Units (SI) and not the other way around. Otherwise it would mean that they are Communists. From my experience with the people in Massachusetts this is certainly within the realm of possibility, but Communists tend not to try and make a profit by screwing over the Proletariate (that’s Capitalism baby), which leads me to believe that the people at Welch’s are not Communists but instead just greedy bastards. But if you still think they are working in SI units, then fine. They screwed me out of 15 mL.
And let me close by saying that I sure hope people in Iran aren’t reading this because just by questioning me on this issue you are letting the terrorists win.
plummyduck said...
I feel this blogger has overestimated the savings to the Welch's company by their alleged scheme. Although the estimated juice savings is accurate, the author fails to take into account the increase in packaging on a per ounce basis. Perhaps the company has sacrificed total juice volume in order to conserve potable water. Maybe there is some sort of English/metric conversion problem. Did the blogger actually measure the fluid in the can? Did he actually take the can home and stew about it for two days before posting this article? Was the can disposed of in his general garbage, or was it recycled as it should have been? Are the Welch's people unable to purchase their raw materials from previously-recycled aluminum due to a lack of public participation? The possibilities are endless and, sadly, this author fails to take many of them into account. I hope this blogger takes more pains with his next post.
I almost decided not to dignify the ramblings of the commenter with a response, but I ultimately decided that it was my civic duty to dispel any confusion that the commenter’s words may have stirred in the unsuspecting public. Let me start by pointing out that commenter is clearly trying to mask whatever “arguments” the commenter may have behind a façade of arrogance and academic elitism in order to install a false sense of credibility. Why else, for example, would the commenter use such terms as “potable” instead of coming right out and saying “drinkable”, unless of course the commenter’s argument doesn’t hold water (potable or otherwise) and the commenter is just trying to impress people with vocabulary? This is further substantiated by the fact that the pseudonym “plummyduck” is clearly intended to illicit subconscious associations with the character from the popular board game Clue named Plum, who is a professor. Using such gimmicks is a clear indication of not only a bad argument but of a low moral integrity. I, however, am above such tricks and will attack the “arguments” themselves (however pitiful they may be) and not take the low road of pointing out that the commenter’s matriarch engages in sexual promiscuity for which she receive financial compensation.
Let us start with what appears to be the crux of the commenter’s argument, that perhaps I am to blame for not recycling. For starters, this is the type of argument that is eroding our American values. The kid is not to blame for his killing all his schoolmates in a psychotic rage. He played violent video games. Blame society. Blame his parents. Blame his victims for getting in the way of the bullets he fired. Blame the victim who was wrongly deprived of precious OJ for not recycling. Anything but hold someone accountable for personable responsibility. Whatever the current status of aluminum recycling, clearly other canned beverage providers are fully capable of providing the entire 12 fluid ounces. Why can’t Welch’s? The whole issue is made moot anyway since I could not possibly recycle the can until after I purchased and consumed the OJ at which point the transgression had already taken place. While I know of some states where you can turn in your can to get back a recycling deposit (Texas, by the way, is not one of them), I do not believe there is a single one where you can turn in your can for half an ounce of orange juice.
Lets look at some of the other points. The commenter is correct in assuming that I did not measure the volume myself, but only because I trusted the company to meet the amount of OJ they promised on the can, although I guess the mere fact that they deprive you of half an ounce already shows that such trust is probably unwarranted. The assertion that it may be a conversion error is ludicrous since Welch’s is an American company based in Concord, Ma and thus clearly uses United States Customary Units (USCU) and thus did not arrive at 11.5 instead of 12 by some conversion error. If there were any unit conversion error it would be in converting to the International System of Units (SI) and not the other way around. Otherwise it would mean that they are Communists. From my experience with the people in Massachusetts this is certainly within the realm of possibility, but Communists tend not to try and make a profit by screwing over the Proletariate (that’s Capitalism baby), which leads me to believe that the people at Welch’s are not Communists but instead just greedy bastards. But if you still think they are working in SI units, then fine. They screwed me out of 15 mL.
And let me close by saying that I sure hope people in Iran aren’t reading this because just by questioning me on this issue you are letting the terrorists win.
posted by boywondre at 6:03 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home