2: Most people that do smoke weed do not smoke weed all of the time.
3: The $21 an ounce weed was an example of 1990s quality weed and not of the highly powerful exotic hybrid enhanced saturated stuff that you can get. Most people prefer to smoke the more expensive, more powerful, condensed stuff.
Perhaps they genuinely thought I wasn’t aware that not everyone smokes weed, but it came across as though they were being defensive over something that was meant as a throwaway statement.
Rhetorical questions are fun to put together and also to tear down bad takes, but it takes a lot practice which is why debate clubs in schools and communities are so critical.
That isn’t saying the opposite though, it’s making a separate point altogether.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, healthy discourse is far better than echo chambers, but I don’t think that nullifies the possibility that someone can choose to engage a person in debate for defensive reasons; I wasn’t looking to debate the existence of non smokers, or whether most smokers have a daily addiction or not, I was simply curious about how the sales work in Washington state.
Id say that by responding in such a manner, they are shutting down any discourse, rather than promoting questions. I genuinely was interested in how pricing and everything else worked, so whilst the question may have been rhetorical; the curiosity was sincere.
1: Not everybody smokes weed.
2: Most people that do smoke weed do not smoke weed all of the time.
3: The $21 an ounce weed was an example of 1990s quality weed and not of the highly powerful exotic hybrid enhanced saturated stuff that you can get. Most people prefer to smoke the more expensive, more powerful, condensed stuff.
Chill mate, it’s called a joke.
You sound like you need some of the stronger stuff tbh man.
There’s nothing rude about their comment, maybe you need to take your own advice?
Love Washington. I take an edible when I’m having trouble sleeping. About $20 for 100mg of THC/CBD blend.
Perhaps they genuinely thought I wasn’t aware that not everyone smokes weed, but it came across as though they were being defensive over something that was meant as a throwaway statement.
Not defensive, I just enjoy answering rhetorical questions. It’s a hobby of mine.
Fuck yeah.
Rhetorical questions are fun to put together and also to tear down bad takes, but it takes a lot practice which is why debate clubs in schools and communities are so critical.
Pathos, logos, ethos, my dudes.
Exactly my point. Starting a debate over a comment is defensive in nature.
I’m literally saying the opposite.
People need to learn to debate ideas and digest imperfect expressions from others by engaging in curiosity, not judgement.
Ask more questions, assume less.
That isn’t saying the opposite though, it’s making a separate point altogether.
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, healthy discourse is far better than echo chambers, but I don’t think that nullifies the possibility that someone can choose to engage a person in debate for defensive reasons; I wasn’t looking to debate the existence of non smokers, or whether most smokers have a daily addiction or not, I was simply curious about how the sales work in Washington state.
Id say that by responding in such a manner, they are shutting down any discourse, rather than promoting questions. I genuinely was interested in how pricing and everything else worked, so whilst the question may have been rhetorical; the curiosity was sincere.
You do you mate; but I’d say there are better hobbies out there.
Besides, I never asked how many people smoked weed, so you weren’t answering a question at all, You were just being belligerent.