• synae[he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -423 days ago

    When you order a dozen (or more) donuts it’s absolutely normal to be asked if an assortment is ok, or if you’d like to choose. Unless you have specific restrictions or preferences, the assortment is the way to go - even then, if you see coconut go in, you just say, “oh no coconut please”. You’ll get the most popular kinds and maybe some that haven’t been selling well that they need to get rid of. Also, you don’t waste the time of everyone in the shop with “uh, 3 of these, 4 of those, wait, 4 of these and um um what’s that one? no thanks”. But the important part is you left the choices up to the baker to make a sensible choice.

    So “whatever makes sense” is probably the best option and not even an odd way to say it.

    It’s certainly not “dismissive”, if anything it’s respectful of their knowledge and ability to put together a nice selection. I realize we’re just talking about donuts here but if you’re working with donuts every day even as a minimum wage employee, you know more about donuts than most people. And hey, if you’re a donut connoisseur just tell them “I’ll pick” and rattle them all off. They’ll appreciate that too.

    • @Serinus
      link
      223 days ago

      Did you see the video?

      • synae[he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -423 days ago

        No, did someone say there was a video? I haven’t even heard about this aWkwArD interaction except for what the other poster said.

        I’m just saying it’s normal, maybe even good, to say “whatever” to a donut shop person when ordering.

          • synae[he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            222 days ago

            For some reason that video didn’t load, so I searched for “jd vance georgia donut shop” and found this instead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2QhtLzz2BM – which filled me in.

            Though, I’m still confused where the context is coming from that there was a video to watch. [email protected]’s comment was the first I’d heard of any of these food-related campaign events, and it implied (based on the context of the post) that Walz was the “awkward” one somehow.

            Though at this point I’m even more confused by [email protected] bringing those things up in the context of the original post which is about NYT fact checking bias.

            Overall this whole thread has been a shitshow for me and another lesson to not comment on the internet before I’ve had coffee.

            Anyway, thanks for the link which pushed me to dig a little deeper and understand a little better

            • Final Remix
              link
              122 days ago

              Nah, it’s Vance. I misread the original post in my bleary-eyed half asleep idiocy.

    • @Snapz
      link
      -323 days ago

      Yikes, you’re doing so much work here, bud… This is weird.

      But anyways, how long have you been in this thread?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        223 days ago

        This attack on his “whatever makes sense” is the equivalent of the “dijon on a hamburger!” uproar. Vance has got plenty of weird shit that actually matters, let’s not try to out stupid Republicans here.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          722 days ago

          Right. The bad part of that encounter was the worker saying she didn’t want to be in the video, and they did it anyway.

          Consent is an issue with these guys.

        • Final Remix
          link
          222 days ago

          Nah, his weirdly dismissive attitude toward everyone there was simply capped by his “whatever makes sense”.

          You just knew the whole order was getting thrown out after the photo op.

      • synae[he/him]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        022 days ago

        Well, for one, you can see how long I’ve been in the thread since there are timestamps on everything

        Second, “so much work here” is really just me talking about how its fine to order donuts as “whatever” or letting the baker/employee pick. Cuz I like donuts, and I like letting them choose for me.

        Third, after watching the video linked by someone else, and seeing how you called me “weird” I understand now that I could be misconstrued as defending JD Vance, which I absolutely am not and would never do. The way that [email protected] described it, I thought both instances were things that Walz did and was being attacked for in a very stupid way (as someone else said, “like attacking dijon mustard” re:Obama) – this is my first time hearing about these silly food related things so I was missing a lot of context which apparently everyone else already has.

        After seeing that video, re-reading some of the comments here (and reading the newer ones) I’m not even sure why the commenter I responded to was talking about Vance without saying his name in the first place. I jumped to a conclusion based on the available context in the thread at the time (which all points Walz) and that was incorrect.

        Lastly, as you can see I can be a bit long-winded when I have something more meaningful to say than a joke, quip or question. So “doing so much work” is relative 😉 – But, I also understand where you were coming from now with the assumption that I am going above and beyond to defend Vance’s conversation - which, as someone else said, went off the rails as soon as video consent was not granted. And I want to reiterate, fuck that fucking couchfucker.

        • @Snapz
          link
          121 days ago

          "Well, for one, you can see how long I’ve been in the thread since there are timestamps on everything

          Second, “so much work here” is really just me talking about how its fine to order donuts as “whatever” or letting the baker/employee pick. Cuz I like donuts, and I like letting them choose for me.

          Third, after watching the video linked by someone else, and seeing how you called me “weird” I understand now that I could be misconstrued as defending JD Vance, which I absolutely am not and would never do. The way that [email protected] described it, I thought both instances were things that Walz did and was being attacked for in a very stupid way (as someone else said, “like attacking dijon mustard” re:Obama) – this is my first time hearing about these silly food related things so I was missing a lot of context which apparently everyone else already has.

          After seeing that video, re-reading some of the comments here (and reading the newer ones) I’m not even sure why the commenter I responded to was talking about Vance without saying his name in the first place. I jumped to a conclusion based on the available context in the thread at the time (which all points Walz) and that was incorrect.

          Lastly, as you can see I can be a bit long-winded when I have something more meaningful to say than a joke, quip or question. So “doing so much work” is relative 😉 – But, I also understand where you were coming from now with the assumption that I am going above and beyond to defend Vance’s conversation - which, as someone else said, went off the rails as soon as video consent was not granted. And I want to reiterate, fuck that fucking couchfucker."

          Okay. Good.