heatfins

heatfins t1_j4wp1ol wrote

How is it clear? You’re talking about authenticity while he’s literally talking about Chicano food which is fusion food that has never stopped rapidly evolving, therefore not really something that’s judgeable as authentic or not.

0

heatfins t1_j0ki0lx wrote

I could be wrong but almost everything around that area closes at 10pm on weekdays. I once saw a couple staying downtown go all the way from the airport there bc it was the only non McDonald’s open. The lack of late night options, especially 24h, has made me seriously consider opening late night food place.

11

heatfins t1_itdlil9 wrote

Reply to comment by -myBIGD in Incredible by extraglop

Nah they only give you a ticket if you followed the law and are perfectly parked except 2 minutes out of parking time or 12 degrees too perpendicular despite being more out of the way than any other car on the street. But park in a no parking zone? Nothing happens

4

heatfins t1_it4hnvw wrote

You’re still on this. I made it very clear that rejecting a word that is CONSISTENTLY USED IN AND OUTSIDE OF ACADEMIA, with NO REAL ACADEMIC DEBATE OVER ITS USE (academic debate over the use of progressive is what you answered to and went on about telos because you only know how to reply in bad faith) is simply trolling. If you want to have a conversation about policy but refuse to use the lexicon as it is defined because of personal reasons, that’s fine, but you made a decision not to have any conversations with anyone other than those who already agree with your point about USE of the word (that all of academia disagrees with you on). If that’s your prerequisite go troll someone else, but to start claiming you’re “truly curious” while essentially deviating the entire conversation so others have to use your personal vocabulary is weird as fuck.

1

heatfins t1_it4gn2b wrote

Ah we’re not. If I used the word progressive the way it means what it means in policy and your argument is to put the word in a vacuum (no words exist in a vacuum) then say the word is objectively useless, and then purposely misunderstand an argument about academia to make it about telos vs the word. That is simply not what someone who is curious does. This is either called arguing in bad faith or having a cognitive disorder.

1

heatfins t1_it4dnny wrote

No, rejecting your outrageously false premise and leaving it there. If I use a word according to its definition and how everyone else uses it and you personally disapprove because it’s inconvenient to your politics, I did not, in fact, exert any control over the word. Extremely odd to accuse someone of something very specific that you JUST did.

1

heatfins t1_it48g1z wrote

Oh I’m sorry I didn’t know that you had this unilateral power to make words that mean things, and are used both colloquially and academically to mean their respective things on a daily basis, but apparently everyone’s a moron except for you. And then you wonder why you’re so alone?

1

heatfins t1_isg2odr wrote

“When you can’t address the problem” what? You literally are the one arguing against those who are advocating addressing the problem and instead hauling them off to inhumane conditions? The term virtue signaling is objectively dumb by the way, you should definitely strive towards some sort of virtue, and if that virtue is not locking up people in inhumane centers, that’s a virtue I’m willing to publicly shame you for not wanting to have

−1