Why would you choose a time you did not eat the food as an example of why the food is not good?
Choosing that story if it were your only time being in contact with that food would make a ton of sense.
Also, there’s no need to be insulting. It serves no purpose.
I get why getting behind any vehicle moving at 30% of the expected rate of speed is an annoyance, and that annoyance is doubly so when it’s a person just doing recreation.
But what I come back to is that cycling isn’t just recreation. It’s also a legitimate form of transportation for some people who cannot drive (for various reasons) or for those who cannot afford it. It’s also one of the last remaining forms that isn’t privacy-invasive (either by the state or corporations).
People on two wheels should be conscious of holding up traffic, but those on four don’t own the roads. We’re all in this together.
I know you mean that 30% their employees are gay, but it tickles me that it reads like you’re assigning them a position on the Kinsey scale.
someone else brings some in. And, because I have eyes, I can see them falling apart before even being picked up. And I conclude that I’m still not missing out on anything.
You’re maintaining that this sentence doesn’t carry the implication that you didn’t eat the food?
It’s the writing that needs work. Your comments heavily suggest that you only have seen the food but never halve eaten it. Is that incorrect?
The one nearest me is owned by a gay couple. Not sure how that slipped through the cracks…
So you’ve never eaten it and are judging it as bad food?
Yet here you are…