I did a search, found Anheuser-Busch had the factual information.
I quoted this:
Then I had The three following quotes:
and
HELLO Am I that invisible that you can’t read my information that I quoted from THE source?
Okay maybe I am on ignore but I answered the question in my post and I can’t believe that all three of those posters have me on ignore. Shit I hardly even post anymore but this leaves me to question.
Do you people really even read the thread or do you have people on ignore or maybe you just skim over things because you don’t want to see what someone quoted with factual evidence, even in MPSIMS?
I know this is a stupid rant but still, I ask, do you people really read the thread before you put in your words? I have been known to do it but I usually put a disclaimer and it’s usually here in the Pit when I do that.
I don’t get it. The information is there, no comprende. A stupid thread like that deserves more than a skim because you might actually learn something before opening your mouth.
If people don’t read the threads and post mindlessly, then what’ the damn point? Even in MPSIMS.
It’s still a poor excuse unless it’s a huge thread, (this wasn’t) and it IS the SDMB. I have higher standards I guess.
Read the content, maybe you don’t have to repeat what someone else said and make your answer look competely stupid or redundant.
I have the issue with that. I try to read but since I only get here a few times a week, if that, then the longer threads I avoid. The shorter the thread the more likely I am to read it and respond if I have something worthwhile to say and try to read through it before responding so I don’t sound like I am not reading it all. If it’s a long one then I tell people I haven’t read the majority of the thread. But I still don’t get it.
I don’t always follow those rules I live by but I try. This was just one of those threads that left me scratching my head because it wasn’t long AND the facts were listed. I don’t get it.
brbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrbrb ( if anyone asks that’s me shaking my head back and forth with my lips and tongue loose)
Ummm excuse me Gary kumquat but in most circles a number is usually rounded up, as did the OP at 3 grams. I quoted that it was 2.9 2.9 grams of carbohydrates per what Anheuser-Busch said in their press release.
I hardly think this an over sight but yet a person who didn’t read the thread and only read the OP. Had he read the thread he would have (I would hope) understand that 2.9 grams of carbs could also be 3.0 to make things even. That’s exactly how I read it and I am sure, maybe not, most people that read that thread and my quote based on the OP.
Oh and let me clarify that, a bottle in the US is 12 ounces by standard. A can of Coke is 12 ounces, a can of Pepsi is 12 ounces, a can of seltzer is 12 ounces…most bottles of beer are 12 ounces by US standards.
Unless you’re familiar with low carb diets, or similar, it’s more than reasonable for someone to actually check that a carb is one gram of carbohydrate.
As a matter of fact I am familiar with low carb diets, on one at the moment you dork. The OP in THAT thread had nothing to say about it. I commented on it based on factual stuff I found directly from the brewer and people ignored it.
So what is your problem?
But my post stated it’s grams of carb per 12 ounce serving. I think you are just wanting to start a little cat fight, which you wont get. I stated my small and yet limited beef in my OP and you are just picking at scabs, picking at scabs Gary. Fro no reason other than to pick at scabs and a fight…sooo damn sad.
The point, oh bad tempered one, is that not everyone has been on a low carb diet, or knows what a carb is.
OP refers to 3 carbs a bottle.
You post website blurb containing, amongst other info, that said beer contains 2.9 grams of carbohydrate a bottle.
Person asks reasonable question of “is a carb a gram of carbohydate”.
For this you accuse him of not reading your post, or of mindlessness, then accuse me of spoiling for a fight, and start calling me a dork. If anyone’s got a problem…
I thought a “carb” was some bizarre imperial measure that our cousins over the pond use (does it not strike anyone else as weird to mix grammes with fluid ounces?).
I will say mea culpa a little, though, coz I admit I posted before I had done any research, and didn’t read techchick’s quote before replying.
Why didn’t I read it? I dunno. Perhaps coz I was associating quoted stuff with people commenting on posts that have already been on the thread, rather than stuff from external sources. Clearly I’m not “showing off” my knowledge.
Yes, I’m afraid that, whether we like it or not, most people, even those who consider themselves enlightened, are not here to learn.
Quite many people read the Opening Post and then post themselves, overlooking what others have already said in order to put their erudition on display. That’s just how it is.
On the one hand, I totally side with techchick on this, in that I don’t buy what you’re saying, Gary. I can totally see why she’s pissed off. Her post explicitly answers Jjimm’s question, and the two other subsequent posts.
On the other hand, I would have let it lie. I totally understand ** Omniscient’s** second post in that thread.
Please tell me where she says that a carb = 1 gram of carbohydrate. Now if you’re arguing that her answer implies 1 carb = 1 gram of carbohydrate, fine, but what the hell is wrong with someone asking just to be sure?
Gary, jjimm already admitted that he didn’t read techchick’s post before posting his question. I think it is fairly well obvious that if one person says “3 carbs per serving” and another person cites “2.9g of carbs per serving” that they’re talking the same units.
There would be nothing wrong with asking to be sure, but jjimm didn’t do that, he just didn’t read her post. Which is exactly what techchick is griping about.
I understand her frustration as well. She goes out and researches an answer, does some actual leg work, and by all appearances, nobody is reading her post.
