@[email protected]M to Science [email protected] • 2 years ago🤌🤌🤌mander.xyzimagemessage-square9fedilinkarrow-up1346arrow-down13
arrow-up1343arrow-down1image🤌🤌🤌mander.xyz@[email protected]M to Science [email protected] • 2 years agomessage-square9fedilink
minus-squareBoz (he/him)linkfedilink12•2 years agoWhich I think is a little funny, since the restaurant only has one star.
minus-square@ChocoboRocketlink7•edit-22 years agoPlants do the star scale in reverse, with one star being the best All other star ratings are effectively bad, since they aren’t known to support life, let alone plants. It’s a pretty strange system, but hey I can’t photosynthesize anything so what do I know about the nuances of their star systems
minus-square@[email protected]OPMlinkfedilink3•2 years agoGolf scoring because they’re fancy like that.
minus-squareBoz (he/him)linkfedilink2•2 years agoOh, I see. I suppose I should expect that kind of reverse valuation from organisms that inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen.
Which I think is a little funny, since the restaurant only has one star.
Plants do the star scale in reverse, with one star being the best
All other star ratings are effectively bad, since they aren’t known to support life, let alone plants.
It’s a pretty strange system, but hey I can’t photosynthesize anything so what do I know about the nuances of their star systems
Golf scoring because they’re fancy like that.
Oh, I see. I suppose I should expect that kind of reverse valuation from organisms that inhale carbon dioxide and exhale oxygen.
This is super clever.