My sister loves - in kind of a grim way - telling the story of once going out to a nice restaurant with some friends. They waited a long time to be seated. The waiter ignored them for awhile. The food was then a long time in coming, and just about every order was wrong in one way or another. By the end of the evening, by agreement, they each left a single penny as a tip. When they left, the waiter made a beeline to the door to say to them all, very sarcastically, “Oh, thank you so much.”
I put it to this board that D’Anconia does not argue in true faith. I am not calling him/her a troll, but his/her board behaviour does not promote honest discourse in any way. Regardless of his/her political leanings (and I have NO idea what they might be, given the nature of his/her posts) I think interacting with D’Anconia is a waste of fucking time and a waste of bandwith and a waste of oxygen…YMMV of course, but I am done.
This is the Pit, you can absolutely call them a troll; I have and will continue to do so. I heartily encourage the other posters to stop pouring troll chow down its throat.
I mean, it’s either troll or an inability to understand the most basic aspects of the world. I’d know I’d rather be called a troll than being called stupid.
Francisco D’Anconia is a character in Atlas Shrugged, one of John Galt’s buddies. So our friend D’Anconia, being a libertarian and a Randite, is simply out of touch with reality. That isn’t ‘stupid’ per se, but it comes to the same result.
Dismissing a citation with a so-called “impeachment” of the citation based on nothing more than ad hominem attack on the source is absolutely NOT “how debates work.” It’s how they go off the rails.
Feel free to subject such sources to closer scrutiny, if you wish, but “how debates work” obligates you to evaluate their assertions in good faith.
Not that I expect the likes of you to understand, or to adhere to such principles.
ETA: Please step aside, Colibri; I’m trying to heap some opprobrium on D’Anconia, here.
In fact it can be a difficult proposition to use milk or cream as it should be. IIRC you’re supposed to put the dairy in your cup first; then you pour in the tea from the pot it’s been steeping in. But in the majority of American restaurants if you ask for tea you get a mug of hot water with a bag in it. IME only the better independent coffeeshops and dedicated tea shops–i.e. the ones that tend to use dainty china cups and teapots, presented with etageres of watercress sandwiches and the like.
Tea from a teapot precedes milk additives; milk definitely has to go in after if one uses a teabag in the cup because otherwise it blocks the bag’s pores.
“One should pour tea into the cup first… The milk-first school can bring forward some fairly strong arguments, but I maintain that my own argument is unanswerable. This is that, by putting the tea in first and stirring as one pours, one can exactly regulate the amount of milk whereas one is liable to put in too much milk if one does it the other way round.” * George Orwell
Orwell always struck me as the type to drink his tea from a sturdy ceramic mug, rather than from a dainty porcelain teacup vulnerable to cracking from thermal stress.
ETA; and his argument IS answerable. It is practicable to put just enough milk into the cup to prevent cracking, and to adjust for the proper colour once the tea has been poured in, and the danger past.
