Prestron

joined 1 year ago
[–] Prestron 3 points 1 year ago

Ha! I'm not going to talk down about a convenient machine especially if it still makes a good cup. I also have a moka pot and french press but I'm not using them that often. I'm also grinding with a Baratza Encore. It seemed like an expense at the time, but I'm ok spending money on something you'll use everyday, gives good results, and lasts.

[–] Prestron 3 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Coffee is life. It's one of my daily rituals and today I also made pancakes.

What equipment and beans are you using? I'm not going to judge if it's something simple. I'm a fan of the V60 and Aeropress, and I'm usually brewing a medium roast from a few local roasters.

[–] Prestron 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Personally I'm not opposed to journalists having an opinion and using it to shape their work. I think it's essential.

I suggested this hypothetical rule as an example of a rule that is measurable. Also it's about the discussion on what kind of news community we want here and I'm thinking about newspapers and the distinction between the news and opinion sections. Does that example make more sense?

[–] Prestron 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Sorry about the duplicate comments. Not sure if it was the server or the app I was using, but I didn't think they posted until it was too late and I re submitted it.

Anyway, I agree to this idea in theory, but only if there are extremely clear thresholds before the rule is invoked. For example: a limit on authors' statements of opinion. Ways that are unacceptable for the article to refer to its subjects.

Basically I think we should debate the rules we want, but once we have consensus I wouldn't want us also fighting about what does or doesn't break the rules. Let's please make the rules clear and measurable.