v for frequency?...

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, July 29, 2023 at 9:40:21 PM UTC+10, Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Mon, 29 May 2023 20:31:53 +0100, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk...@arcor.de> wrote:
Am 29.05.23 um 20:45 schrieb rbowman:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 07:22:25 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

<snip>

Yes, enforced by British military. That makes friends for a hundred years. Not.

Who cares? They\'re only Irish, not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

One would have thought that the Scottish wanker would be aware of the highland clearances that sent a lot of the more intelligent highland Scots to Canada and New Zealand. The smarter Irish went to Australia.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Peeler]

On 30 Jul 2023 00:35:17 GMT, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

More likely that was when Baldwin sold Starbucks to Schultz to concentrate
on the Peets brand. I\'ve only been to Starbucks once when my brother
shuffled through his deck of gift cards and decided to use the Starbucks
one. I lived.

I\'m not interested in the milkshakes that seem to be Starbuck\'s real draw
and there are several local shops and roasters that I prefer to support.
If I get really ambitious I\'ve got some green beans from Sweet Maria\'s.

Thanks for yet more thrilling details about your exciting personality, you
abnormal self-infatuated and self-admiring senile GOSSIP! <tsk>

--
More typical idiotic senile gossip by lowbrowwoman:
\"It\'s been years since I\'ve been in a fast food burger joint but I used
to like Wendy\'s because they had a salad bar and baked potatoes.\"
MID: <ivdi4gF8btlU1@mid.individual.net>

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 12:40:12 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
<CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 29 May 2023 20:31:53 +0100, Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> wrote:

Am 29.05.23 um 20:45 schrieb rbowman:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 07:22:25 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

I suspect that a minority of europeans could often afford cheese 500
years ago. Malnutrition was usual.

500 years ago was prior to the Industrial Revolution when people were
herded off the land and into the dark satanic mills.

.. and did those feet in ancient times...

Most would have had
at least one cow, sheep, or goat. You can only use so much milk so cheese

Same here in the German Saar county where I live. Industry was
iron & coal and the workers families used to have at least a
goat. They were \"Bergmann-Bauern\", miner-farmers to survive.

was made to store the surplus, or if you really had a surplus, to feed the
hogs.

It took industrialization to create widespread malnutrition, or sometimes
outside forces. Ireland was a net exporter of food during the Famine.

Yes, enforced by British military. That makes friends for a
hundred years. Not.

Who cares? They\'re only Irish, not the sharpest knives in the drawer.

One of my customers is Irish. They make the best scientific CCD and
ICCD cameras in the world.

The Irish are practical and make good engineers and, occasionally,
scientists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Irish_scientists

 

[Peeler]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2023 08:07:13 -0700, John Larkin, another obviously brain
dead, troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered:


> One of my customers is Irish.

Your best customer is the unwashed trolling Scottish wanker that you keep
sucking off with a vengeance, you troll-feeding senile shithead!

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2023-07-26, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 17:35:34 -0400, Ralph Mowery
rmowery42@charter.net> wrote:

In article <u9pbku$16t4h$4@dont-email.me>,
vir.campestris@invalid.invalid says...

Keeping them almost the same, at 450 and 900, might have made sense -
you don\'t want to have to replace all the tins.

But instead they went down to 400 and 800. I don\'t recall the price
changing...



Many items in the grocery store have reduced in actual product but the
container stays the same size. They think the people doing the buying
will notice.

Getting the exact amount shown on the label, or slightly over, is a
legal issue in the USA.

If you buy a hundred bags of potato chips and weigh them on a precise
scale, which we did, none are below weight. And none are over by more
than about half a chip. Most are over by less than half the average
chip.

They add a half chip, if needed, to meet the target weight.

--
Jasen.
🇺🇦 Слава Україні

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 12:06:38 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

On 23/06/2023 16:02, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:14:59 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 17:05:12 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

You should meet a better class of women. Try.

Those are very rare.

Nature has thoughtfully arranged that there is a good mate for just
about anyone. But the farther out on the distribution you happen to
be, the harder it will be to find that good mate. So you have to shop
around.

The mistake I see some people making is \"I\'m lonely, so I\'ll latch
onto the first person I see walking down the street\".

I qualify opamps more carefully than some people qualify spouses.

Once upon a time people had four arms, four legs, two faces and two sets
of genitalia. There were males, females and hermaphrodites. They
offended the Gods, who split them all into two. The faces and genitalia
were moved to the new front, and where they were joined was gathered up
and became the navel.

We just have to find our \"other half\".

I recently read a paper that explains why most critters (and most
plants) have two sexes. Evolution found that to be optimum. I\'ll see
if I can find it.

Wouldn\'t it be better if there were seven sexes and mating required one of each in a big romp? The kids would have a huge array of genetics to choose from.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 16:02:02 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:14:59 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Mon, 29 May 2023 17:05:12 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 29 May 2023 16:57:58 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Sat, 27 May 2023 04:06:16 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 27 May 2023 02:50:35 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Sun, 23 Apr 2023 00:52:59 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Sat, 22 Apr 2023 11:40:48 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

Safeway is for bulk shopping, milk and paper towels. Their rotesserie
chickens are OK and make great broth.

We no longer have Safeway. When Albertson\'s bought the chain they had to
divest themselves of the Safeway stores in Missoula which became Fresh
Markets which were recently bought by Yokes. The changes were minimal as
far as I can tell.

We had a Lucky\'s Market that lasted two years. Tidyman\'s was another
option but losing a $6.3 million sexual discrimination suit put the chain
out of business.

Why the fuck is $6.3 million require to shut up some lesbians?

Tough market. When I used to travel I was amazed at how much cheaper food
was in LA, Phoenix, Seattle or other major markets.

\"The Love that dare not speak its name\" is now \"The Love that won\'t
shut up.\"

No woman ever shuts up. We are yet to discover the faulty gene to switch off.

You should meet a better class of women. Try.

Those are very rare.

Nature has thoughtfully arranged that there is a good mate for just
about anyone. But the farther

Why do people say farther instead of further? Technically it makes sense, it\'s far, not fur you\'re adding to. But farther sounds like father, and therefore sounds like you got the wrong word.

out on the distribution you happen to
be, the harder it will be to find that good mate. So you have to shop
around.

But if you\'re far out on the distribution, your mate will be too, so rubbish. A rubbish man cannot get a brilliant woman.

The mistake I see some people making is \"I\'m lonely, so I\'ll latch
onto the first person I see walking down the street\".

I qualify opamps more carefully than some people qualify spouses.

If I chose carefully, I\'d never have sex.

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 6:12:25 AM UTC+10, Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 12:06:38 +0100, John Larkin <jla...@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Max Demian
max_d...@bigfoot.com> wrote:

On 23/06/2023 16:02, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:14:59 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
C...@nospam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 17:05:12 +0100, John Larkin <jla...@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

<snip>

> Wouldn\'t it be better if there were seven sexes and mating required one of each in a big romp? The kids would have a huge array of genetics to choose from.

Sadly, there\'s no mechanism that allows you to choose which DNA sequence you put into action, and while evolution has equipped modern humans with a medical profession to give them advice about which set of DNA might have worked best if they had had a choice, it hasn\'t yet come up with infallible medical professionals.

The advice that the Scottish wanker would get would probably be along the lines of \"junk the lot you have got - there\'s no way to get it work well\".

He\'s what evolution would have selected out, if it worked better.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Max Demian]

On 01/08/2023 21:12, Commander Kinsey wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 12:06:38 +0100, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On 23/06/2023 16:02, John Larkin wrote:

Nature has thoughtfully arranged that there is a good mate for just
about anyone. But the farther out on the distribution you happen to
be, the harder it will be to find that good mate. So you have to shop
around.

The mistake I see some people making is \"I\'m lonely, so I\'ll latch
onto the first person I see walking down the street\".

I qualify opamps more carefully than some people qualify spouses.

Once upon a time people had four arms, four legs, two faces and two sets
of genitalia. There were males, females and hermaphrodites. They
offended the Gods, who split them all into two. The faces and genitalia
were moved to the new front, and where they were joined was gathered up
and became the navel.

We just have to find our \"other half\".

I recently read a paper that explains why most critters (and most
plants) have two sexes. Evolution found that to be optimum. I\'ll see
if I can find it.

Wouldn\'t it be better if there were seven sexes and mating required one
of each in a big romp?  The kids would have a huge array of genetics to
choose from.

By the time the seven sexes were together one or two would have lost
interest.

--
Max Demian

 

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 21:12:15 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
<CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 12:06:38 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

On 23/06/2023 16:02, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:14:59 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 17:05:12 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

You should meet a better class of women. Try.

Those are very rare.

Nature has thoughtfully arranged that there is a good mate for just
about anyone. But the farther out on the distribution you happen to
be, the harder it will be to find that good mate. So you have to shop
around.

The mistake I see some people making is \"I\'m lonely, so I\'ll latch
onto the first person I see walking down the street\".

I qualify opamps more carefully than some people qualify spouses.

Once upon a time people had four arms, four legs, two faces and two sets
of genitalia. There were males, females and hermaphrodites. They
offended the Gods, who split them all into two. The faces and genitalia
were moved to the new front, and where they were joined was gathered up
and became the navel.

We just have to find our \"other half\".

I recently read a paper that explains why most critters (and most
plants) have two sexes. Evolution found that to be optimum. I\'ll see
if I can find it.

Wouldn\'t it be better if there were seven sexes and mating required one of each in a big romp? The kids would have a huge array of genetics to choose from.

Evolution didn\'t like that. Not even four.

Two people in one bed is bad enough. Out of seven, probably three will
snore and there will be a line for the bathroom.

 

[Peeler]

On Wed, 2 Aug 2023 13:31:17 +0100, Max Dumbian, the REAL dumb, notorious,
troll-feeding senile idiot, blathered again:

By the time the seven sexes were together one or two would have lost
interest.

More of your and his congenital idiocy on display, Max Dumbian, you
subnormal troll-feeding senile asshole?

--
Max Dumb having another senile moment:
\"It\'s the consistency of the shit that counts. Sometimes I don\'t need to
wipe, but I have to do so to tell. Also humans have buttocks to get
smeared due to our bipedalism.\"
MID: <6vydnWiYDoV1VUrDnZ2dnUU78QednZ2d@brightview.co.uk>

And yet another senile moment:
\"A fawn bowl will show piss a lot less than a white one.\"
MID: <tv1of3$1v4qg$1@dont-email.me>

 

[Peeler]

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 09:10:06 -0700, John Larkin, another obviously brain
dead, troll-feeding senile asshole, blathered:

Evolution didn\'t like that. Not even four.

Two people in one bed is bad enough. Out of seven, probably three will
snore and there will be a line for the bathroom.

And another useless troll-feeding senile piece of shit comes doddering along
to spread yet more of its useless senile shit in these groups!

 

[Joe Gwinn]

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 09:10:06 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 21:12:15 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 12:06:38 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

On 23/06/2023 16:02, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:14:59 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 17:05:12 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

You should meet a better class of women. Try.

Those are very rare.

Nature has thoughtfully arranged that there is a good mate for just
about anyone. But the farther out on the distribution you happen to
be, the harder it will be to find that good mate. So you have to shop
around.

The mistake I see some people making is \"I\'m lonely, so I\'ll latch
onto the first person I see walking down the street\".

I qualify opamps more carefully than some people qualify spouses.

Once upon a time people had four arms, four legs, two faces and two sets
of genitalia. There were males, females and hermaphrodites. They
offended the Gods, who split them all into two. The faces and genitalia
were moved to the new front, and where they were joined was gathered up
and became the navel.

We just have to find our \"other half\".

I recently read a paper that explains why most critters (and most
plants) have two sexes. Evolution found that to be optimum. I\'ll see
if I can find it.

Wouldn\'t it be better if there were seven sexes and mating required one of each in a big romp? The kids would have a huge array of genetics to choose from.

Evolution didn\'t like that. Not even four.

Two people in one bed is bad enough. Out of seven, probably three will
snore and there will be a line for the bathroom.

Yeah. The mechanics and body plans could be complicated too.

On a biology note, in-vitro fertilization sometimes uses three people,
one for the male genome, one for the female genome, the third for the
female mitochondria.

The issue is that with two people, the female provides both a genome
and all the mitochondria (male mitochondria are discarded), but
mitochondria have their own little genome, which can be defective, and
getting mitochondria from some other female allows mitochondria
defects to be remedied.

Joe Gwinn

 

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 14:10:09 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 09:10:06 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandSNIPMEtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 01 Aug 2023 21:12:15 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 12:06:38 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Sat, 24 Jun 2023 11:43:32 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

On 23/06/2023 16:02, John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jun 2023 07:14:59 +0100, \"Commander Kinsey\"
CK1@nospam.com> wrote:
On Mon, 29 May 2023 17:05:12 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

You should meet a better class of women. Try.

Those are very rare.

Nature has thoughtfully arranged that there is a good mate for just
about anyone. But the farther out on the distribution you happen to
be, the harder it will be to find that good mate. So you have to shop
around.

The mistake I see some people making is \"I\'m lonely, so I\'ll latch
onto the first person I see walking down the street\".

I qualify opamps more carefully than some people qualify spouses.

Once upon a time people had four arms, four legs, two faces and two sets
of genitalia. There were males, females and hermaphrodites. They
offended the Gods, who split them all into two. The faces and genitalia
were moved to the new front, and where they were joined was gathered up
and became the navel.

We just have to find our \"other half\".

I recently read a paper that explains why most critters (and most
plants) have two sexes. Evolution found that to be optimum. I\'ll see
if I can find it.

Wouldn\'t it be better if there were seven sexes and mating required one of each in a big romp? The kids would have a huge array of genetics to choose from.

Evolution didn\'t like that. Not even four.

Two people in one bed is bad enough. Out of seven, probably three will
snore and there will be a line for the bathroom.

Yeah. The mechanics and body plans could be complicated too.

We\'d need a gang-size bed. Changing sheets would be a nuisance.

On a biology note, in-vitro fertilization sometimes uses three people,
one for the male genome, one for the female genome, the third for the
female mitochondria.

The issue is that with two people, the female provides both a genome
and all the mitochondria (male mitochondria are discarded), but
mitochondria have their own little genome, which can be defective, and
getting mitochondria from some other female allows mitochondria
defects to be remedied.

Joe Gwinn

I\'ve seen some papers somewhere lately on why we have two sexes.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 07:59:43 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 24/07/2023 15:46, Max Demian wrote:
On 24/07/2023 05:53, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 00:30:51 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

As I\'ve never heard of anyone calling a quart of milk a 2-pint bottle. I
suppose it works when describing a 2 pint warrior; a quart warrior just
isn\'t the same.

You dislike saying 2 pints instead of 1 quart, but you\'ll say 140
pounds instead of 14 stone. Why not go the whole hog and measure
people in ounces?

140 pounds is 10 stone.

Kinsey Doesn\'t Do Sums.

Now try 183 pounds.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 08:03:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:

On 24/07/2023 17:39, rbowman wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 15:46:32 +0100, Max Demian wrote:

On 24/07/2023 05:53, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2023 00:30:51 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

As I\'ve never heard of anyone calling a quart of milk a 2-pint bottle.
I suppose it works when describing a 2 pint warrior; a quart warrior
just isn\'t the same.

You dislike saying 2 pints instead of 1 quart, but you\'ll say 140
pounds instead of 14 stone. Why not go the whole hog and measure
people in ounces?

140 pounds is 10 stone.

Minor detail... Are British bathroom scales calibrated in stones.

Mine is. Stones and kg.

Calibrated isn\'t the right word.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 13:40:16 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

ba
On 25/07/2023 07:04, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2023 19:36:53 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com
wrote:
On 28/05/2023 18:00, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2023 11:55:19 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

Before they found a way to flavour \"crisps\" (as we call them) all our
crisps were plain, with salt in a little screw of blue paper so you
could add as much or little as you liked. Now you can get plain with
the
salt in a little blue bag.

I\'ve never seen that here, separate salt. Would anyone like unsalted
chips? Seems unlikely.

Probably not. The point is there wasn\'t a way to make them salty until
they found a way to coat the chips/crisps, in the late 60s in the UK I
think. Salt doesn\'t dissolve in cooking oil. Then they introduced the
flavours like cheese and onion.

You must have had the same problem in the US, unless people carried salt
cellars around with them.

Dafuq? How can they not know how to put salt on something? You
sprinkle it on and shake it about, like you do with the blue packet ones.

If they just put the salt in the packet it would all fall to the bottom
until they found a way to make it stick to the crisps.

Shake. The. Bag.

Then they started to put other flavoured coatings like cheese and onion.

About the same time they changed from bags made of greaseproof paper to
plastic, and we had to learn how to open them (by pulling them apart or
popping them) as you couldn\'t tear them open like the greaseproof paper
ones.

Learn?! What, did you go on a course or something? Most people don\'t have to learn such basic things.

I think the \"salt and shake\" ones with the separate blue bag of salt can
in a few years later. I don\'t know why they chose to do that, but they
definitely taste different - and, to me, better - from the ready salted.

Same to me, just had the option of less or no salt, which I didn\'t take.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 17:29:07 +0100, John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandsnipmetechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 13:40:16 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

ba
On 25/07/2023 07:04, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2023 19:36:53 +0100, Max Demian <max_demian@bigfoot.com
wrote:
On 28/05/2023 18:00, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 28 May 2023 11:55:19 +0100, Max Demian
max_demian@bigfoot.com> wrote:

Before they found a way to flavour \"crisps\" (as we call them) all our
crisps were plain, with salt in a little screw of blue paper so you
could add as much or little as you liked. Now you can get plain with
the
salt in a little blue bag.

I\'ve never seen that here, separate salt. Would anyone like unsalted
chips? Seems unlikely.

Probably not. The point is there wasn\'t a way to make them salty until
they found a way to coat the chips/crisps, in the late 60s in the UK I
think. Salt doesn\'t dissolve in cooking oil. Then they introduced the
flavours like cheese and onion.

You must have had the same problem in the US, unless people carried salt
cellars around with them.

Dafuq? How can they not know how to put salt on something? You
sprinkle it on and shake it about, like you do with the blue packet ones.

If they just put the salt in the packet it would all fall to the bottom
until they found a way to make it stick to the crisps. Then they started
to put other flavoured coatings like cheese and onion.

About the same time they changed from bags made of greaseproof paper to
plastic, and we had to learn how to open them (by pulling them apart or
popping them) as you couldn\'t tear them open like the greaseproof paper
ones.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/7jbyddg9012hv2p/Chips.jpg?raw=1

Chips at 6400 feet.

Take them up Everest and see if they explode.

I always open crisp packets by bursting one end. Makes it less likely to rip down the side, but scares the shit out of the person next to you.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 20:52:49 +0100, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 07:05:13 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:

Original Kinsey quote:

You dislike saying 2 pints instead of 1 quart, but you\'ll say 140
pounds instead of 14 stone. Why not go the whole hog and measure
people in ounces?


Says the person who multiplies 14 by 14 and gets 140.

I didn\'t. I divided 140 by 14 and got 10.

Then wrote 14.

 

[Commander Kinsey]

On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 15:50:57 +0100, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:

Cindy Hamilton <hamilton@invalid.com> writes:
On 2023-07-25, rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 04:12:24 +0100, Commander Kinsey wrote:

WE buy petrol and diesel in litres but still quote economy in mpg.

You buy litres in America?

Only for beverages...

Not all beverages. Beer is typically sold in 12-ounce bottles or
cans. Possibly a U.S. pint (0.47 litre) at a bar.

Local california german restaurant serves 0.5 liter beers, but yes, that\'s
out of the ordinary in the US.

Why not just drink a whole litre?