Make me a low calorie, high protein product that is tasty and I'll buy you. They need to focus on the health nerds
Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
611–620 of 623 posts
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#612Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#613Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not any less contemptuous and juvenile than your previous comment.
To whom am I showing contempt? Please explain. (Remember: When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names.)
The entire comment was a quotation of something written by someone else, which made me wonder whether you felt that the person you were replying to did not deserve the effort it would have taken to express yourself in your own words.
Being something written for another context with no words added by you to explain how it fits into the current context puts more work on the reader, which implies that the reader needs to put in work to continue to hold up their end of the conversation (whereas you don't need to put in much work or at least don't need to indicate to us that you are putting in work) which in turn tends to put you in the position of a teacher assigning us something to read as homework.
Its being longer than the average HN comment tend to carry the same implication.
Although the comment only weakly implies contempt, your previous comment also implied contempt. If you want me to, I can explain that one, too.
I concede that it is impossible for me to tell whether you actually felt any contempt while writing your 2 comments, but many readers react negatively to even weak signs that contempt might be present.
More importantly, if people see you get away with comments like those 2, that acts as a sort of informal invitation for them to do likewise.
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#614Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been vegan for 12 years. It is not that hard to make vegan burger patties at home. Or you can just cut up a block of tofu and season it to be eaten in a burger. Takes about the same time or less to cook as these Beyond grease fests. Besides there is so many cheaper alternatives these days that I very rarely buy them. We don’t need meat alternatives. Vegan diet is cardiovascularly extremely healthy, seems to pr…
Why are you trashing vegans that are still living unhealthy? Be glad that they still chose to eat vegan. You come off as very militant in that sense.
I gladly trash all people who live unhealthy, myself included. However, that is not what I say in the text, that is what you read into it. Examples of ”unhealthy vegans” are always flatmates who survive purely by vegan donuts or some other absurdity like that, but it has not even anecdotal evidence in terms of health benefits or the lack of thereof of the said diet or any other.
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#615Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have been vegan for 12 years. It is not that hard to make vegan burger patties at home. Or you can just cut up a block of tofu and season it to be eaten in a burger. Takes about the same time or less to cook as these Beyond grease fests. Besides there is so many cheaper alternatives these days that I very rarely buy them. We don’t need meat alternatives. Vegan diet is cardiovascularly extremely healthy, seems to pr…
> ethically and environmentally only viable option at this point Seems like a broad statement that I don't agree with, but why would it be the most important aspect unless the framework is a religious one and that's where your ethical framework derives from? It's a dietary choice, nothing more, and if you feel that way it's perfectly fine to do so, but don't blow it out of proportion. I personally tend to enjoy some…
Are you seriously asking me why ethics and environment might be the most important consideration in the decisions I make? I don’t use cocaine either - not a dietary choice. I also do not bludgeon poor old ladies to death with a shillelagh - not a simple choice how I decide to get my daily exercise.
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#616Earlier quoted context omitted.
To whom am I showing contempt? Please explain. (Remember: When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names.)
The entire comment was a quotation of something written by someone else, which made me wonder whether you felt that the person you were replying to did not deserve the effort it would have taken to express yourself in your own words. Being something written for another context with no words added by you to explain how it fits into the current context puts more work on the reader, which implies that the reader needs t…
>The entire comment was a quotation of something written by someone else
Kinda the whole point of a koan. Doing my own would be cringe.
>did not deserve the effort it would have taken to express yourself in your own words
Not gonna argue with a mod myself. Nope.
>Although the comment only weakly implies contempt, your previous comment also implied contempt. If you want me to, I can explain that one, too.
Nah I definitely implied contempt to the guy who thought avocado oil is an unhealthy thing invented in the past 50 years.
>More importantly, if people see you get away with comments like those 2, that acts as a sort of informal invitation for them to do likewise.
Part of the point of my koan was to talk about what kind of things people might be invited to post here.
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#617Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're strawmaning here. You can take any cause and point the selectiveness of the "people that care of that cause" by putting them in a bag and choosing the bag arguments to argument with.
Was the conversation above an exception to the rule?
It’s not indeed, however while you’re not trying to be negative, what you say sounds like so: "I’m trying to point X are Y" where Y is a characteristic of most humans and not just X. “pointing” X sounds like that group is more Y than the rest of humans. I don’t know if that’s you’re intent (probably not as you said you’re not trying to be negative), but the pointing sounds like it is. Your previous message pointing that growing plant kill animals sounds the same as most activities kill animals (walking in the woods, driving, probably watching Netflix in some extend…). I know you’re responding to someone coming first with the killing topic but I think that’s not a good faith interpretation of their post: they said much more, and also “even if we don't eliminate it entirely". The "natural" grazers around your place where probably the kind of farming that they propose to not eliminate. Don’t feel attacked, it’s not on you or your friends.
> Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead.
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#618That's too bad. I don't expect fake-meats to be healthy, or cheap, but I like that they can be made without killing animals and without raising them in inhumane conditions. I had really hoped that people would say, "Well, if it tastes close enough, then how about I go for the cruelty-free version." And it is close-enough -- it's at least as good as a fast-food hamburger. Perhaps the cognitive dissonance is just too m…
[dead]
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#619Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ethically and environmentally only viable option at this point Seems like a broad statement that I don't agree with, but why would it be the most important aspect unless the framework is a religious one and that's where your ethical framework derives from? It's a dietary choice, nothing more, and if you feel that way it's perfectly fine to do so, but don't blow it out of proportion. I personally tend to enjoy some…
Are you seriously asking me why ethics and environment might be the most important consideration in the decisions I make? I don’t use cocaine either - not a dietary choice. I also do not bludgeon poor old ladies to death with a shillelagh - not a simple choice how I decide to get my daily exercise.
Interestingly enough I also don't use cocaine and don't bludgeon poor ladies to death. I'm also not particularly tempted to do either, but if I did cocaine it certainly wouldn't be an ethical question, more of a recreational indulgence. Seems like we have more in common than different.
Re: Beyond has dropped “meat” from its name and expanded its high-protein drink line
#620Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Isn't that most of it, except for basic grocery ingredients? Only if you live in the us.
I don't. I don't know where you live, but unless it's on a farm, branded foods are obviously not a US-only phenomenon. Anything even remotely processed will be based on proprietary recipes. Regular meat burgers and sausages are just as "proprietary" as Beyond Meat ones, let alone foods like candy bars or snacks. Do you think Snickers bars are not proprietary?
> Regular meat burgers and sausages are just as "proprietary"
This line is a good candidate to be crowned the dumbest thing i'll be reading this year.