I think the hole in the pot handle works great as a place to set the spoon. My friend thinks this should be illegal.
this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
207 points (91.6% liked)
Asklemmy
43945 readers
21 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- [email protected]: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You're assuming the spoon has something I'd want to mix with the main dish on it, that I'm going to eat the food I'm cooking immediately, etc.
Little annoyances add up and small improvements to one's approach to dealing with things can add up as well. You know what makes those "actual problems" worse? Having to deal with a bunch of minor irritations at the same time.
Kind of weird that you seem to think it's ridiculous to want to improve anything that isn't a matter of life and death and earthshaking consequence.
It's not an improvement to have sauce dripping down the handle of your spoon and onto your saucepan handle, or to make yet another hazard over the stove by wedging a spoon precariously into a handle hole. That's my point. There are a million simpler ways to address this that don't make a bigger problem. I find it stunning that you are too lazy to rinse an extra plate, but weirdly insistent on the least logical, awkward, and ridiculous way to avoid it. But hey, let your freak flag fly.
I started my comment with "The solution may be stupid but". That being the case, how could you possibly interpret it as me directly arguing for that particular solution being good?
I find it stunning you are weirdly insistent on interpreting what I said in the absolutely least charitable way possible even though there's no reason to do so and I literally started my comment acknowledging that solution may be "stupid".
Actually, it seems like people on Lemmy are even worse about this than reddit which takes some doing. At least don't interpret stuff in ways that contradict what the person literally said a single post ago. Sometimes it's a little ambiguous, but not in this case.
Oh, so you're arguing for no reason whatsoever. Alrighty, then.
This is some classic projection. What I said boiled down to "this solution may not be a good one, but there's some benefit to solving the problem". In your quest to find a way to criticize what I said, you ignored the first part of what I said entirely.
You seem to be one of those people who will just never admit it if you make a mistake. Doesn't matter if you accidentally said water is dry, you'll never admit water is wet until the end of time. I actually never understand why people dig in like this. It's not like you're saving face by refusing to acknowledge the mistake, it's not like you're going to convince me there's any doubt. Everyone makes mistakes and the best way to deal with them is to acknowledge it early and move on.