Deegham@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 year agomeasuring rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square279fedilinkarrow-up11.38Karrow-down10
arrow-up11.38Karrow-down1imagemeasuring rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneDeegham@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 year agomessage-square279fedilink
minus-squareFal@yiffit.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·11 months agoAre percentages too hard for you?
minus-squareThisOne@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·11 months agoNot nearly as hard as you are working to represent F in chat about personal preference
minus-squareFal@yiffit.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·11 months agoI WILL die on this hill. But preference is just what you do with the information, not the usefulness of the scale. 0-100 is the scale. Whether you wear jackets at 50-60 or 60-70 doesn’t mean that the scale isn’t objectively better.
minus-squareThisOne@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·11 months agoOh yea I think I do agree with you that the C scale is objectively better.
minus-squareFal@yiffit.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·11 months agoCope harder. F is objectively better for environment. C is objectively better for scientific calculation
minus-squareThisOne@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·edit-211 months agoOof you really trying to get others to die on that hill with ya huh?
Are percentages too hard for you?
Not nearly as hard as you are working to represent F in chat about personal preference
I WILL die on this hill. But preference is just what you do with the information, not the usefulness of the scale. 0-100 is the scale. Whether you wear jackets at 50-60 or 60-70 doesn’t mean that the scale isn’t objectively better.
Oh yea I think I do agree with you that the C scale is objectively better.
Cope harder. F is objectively better for environment. C is objectively better for scientific calculation
Oof you really trying to get others to die on that hill with ya huh?
You’re objectively dumb