Deegham@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 months agomeasuring rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square258fedilinkarrow-up11.37Karrow-down10
arrow-up11.37Karrow-down1imagemeasuring rulelemmy.blahaj.zoneDeegham@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 months agomessage-square258fedilink
minus-squareFal@yiffit.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·11 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-up0·11 months agoCope harder. F is objectively better for environment. C is objectively better for scientific calculation
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
You’re objectively dumb