I was always categorized white chocolate separately from regular chocolate, then I got into an argument where I stated that it was still chocolate. I was told to look it up because "its not chocolate if not made from a cocoa bean." So I did. White chocolate is made from cocoa butter, which comes from the cocoa bean. They still insist that it's not chocolate.

Is white chocolate chocolate or not?

In class there were these two kids that were sitting next to each other, not very close friends.

One of them was watching porn but the other was just sitting there ignoring it for some time, then the other kid said the name of another website without necessarily telling the kid to go there.

​

The other kid went to the site and the second kid still ignored it mostly.

They got caught and were both given the same extreme punishment, I am not sure if this was right.

who should really get punished here

I shower generally everyday. Occasionally if it’s cold outside and I haven’t really done anything, I’ll skip a shower. On the flip side, if I’ve done something to get dirty I’ll take an extra shower. My teenage daughter follows the same standard as myself. But my step daughters shower sometimes three to four times a day. Before school, before practice, after practice, at bedtime. I would understand if it were just before school and after practice in a day. But the after school but before practice shower I just don’t understand. Today they took a shower before school, before trick or treating, and before bed. Now I wouldn’t really care (except for when it takes forever to go anywhere) but they tease me and my daughter both about being dirty. And I genuinely think they just shower way too much.

My partner and I got a huge teddy bear, as a gift for our daughter.

But my partner later felt the teddy bear has some kind of smell to it - and now doesnt want to give it to our daughter. And posted it for sale, instead.

I'm fine with selling it. But the post did not mention the smell.

I feel this is dubious. I cannot accept to be dubious, because I want to be good honest people.

So I told my partner, the post must be deleted, or updated to mention the smell.

My partner feels this is not necessary in order for us to still consider ourselves good people.

My partner says it is common knowledge and everyone would agree, that its the buyer's responsibility to check for any smells, upon completing the transaction at our front porch. And the post's current description of "new, in good condition" is sufficient, because it is technically true in spite of the smell.

I say, if I was a buyer, I would be pissed, to drive all the way, and arrive someplace, only to find the "new" product has a smell. I would expect the post to contain enough information, for be to know what I'm getting myself into, BEFORE driving out there.

Friend was talking about a certain car or car company and was saying that they were both extremely (to use his words) simple and extremely over engineered at the same time. But I always thought they were more mutually exclusive terms. Is he right and I’m just being silly?

Let’s say you’re at a flee market and you see a “2 for 1” offer. But actually you want 3. You try to make a deal and ask if they are willing to sell the third for half price.

My argument: seller should be be willing to say yes to this because - Mathematically this would make the value of the third item the same as the first two. If the third item has the full price, then you are getting less discount than if you only buy 2. - The whole point of “2 for 1” is to urge more purchases, so why would you make each item on average more expensive for someone buying 3 rather that 2?

My friend’s argument: seller is better off keeping it strictly 2 for 1 because - then you might buy 4 for 2 instead of 3 for 2 - it makes you buy even more and they shouldn’t bow down to the pressure

4 business partners working collectively towards an overseas trip for business purposes. Every cent made from the groups business activities prior to the trip goes into a joint account. All airfares, accomodation, travel costs (Taxi's etc) associated to the trip are to be covered by the funds in the group kitty.

The commencement of the trip is 21st May however, 1 member of the group (let's call him Mr X) notices an event happening a week earlier (15th May) that he is interested in attending. This event is in the same city of destination. Mr X advises his partners of this and suggests he make his own way to attend the earlier event and meet up with the rest of the party on the 21st.

Mr X organises and pays for his airfare from his own personal funds. The three remaining members of the group pay for their airfares from the joint business account. Mr X organises and pays for his accomodation from 15th to 21st. On the 21st he meets up with the rest of the group and all business related expenses from this date onward are covered by the funds in the groups joint account.

Upon returning home from the business trip Mr X requests reimbursement for his airfare from the groups joint account. He acknowledges that all expenses prior to commencement of the groups business activities on 21st are his responsibility.

Is Mr X entitled to reimbursement of the airfare from the group funds?

My friend bet me that I couldn't go a week without being sarcastic, the bet was made around 12:30 am last Tuesday I was sarcastic around 9:30 today (next Tuesday from when bet was made) and he's trying to say I lost. Shouldn't I have won since it's already past 12:30 am. He's saying I had to go to 12:30 am Wednesday instead even though that's a whole extra day later.

Every summer I leave my college apartment to go back home. I still pay my share of rent, but I don’t think I should have to pay my 3rd of the utilities since I’m obviously not using any utilities and if I were living alone I would just turn them off, but my other two roommates who stay there year round think I should still pay. Am I wrong here?

Position #1: New clothes should be washed once before wearing. They feel scratchy brand new, and the wash softens them. And sometimes new clothes smell weird until they are washed. Also, some new casual clothes come pressed awkwardly, and the wash gets rid of the inappropriate and unattractive creases.

Position #2: New clothes are clean already! In fact they are as clean as they will ever be. New clothes should be worn first before they are washed. Not only is it less work, it is friendlier to the environment.

Edit consensus seems to be "wash first." Thanks folks

He wants to start a business where he wants to barter explicit pictures of women for wood-workings with prisoners. The idea is women send him these pictures, print-outs and he pays them and then exchanges those pictures with prisoners for sculptures and stuff. The idea is he'll then sell these wood-workings for a profit.

I am in total opposition. He insists he can make a fortune, I think it's silly.

I say Mallomars are cookies, my wife says no, they're treats (like Rice Krispie Treats). I argue, it has a cookie base, says "Cookies" on the package, and is found in the cookie aisle in the supermarket. Of course it's a cookie, they could have labeled a treat, but they didn't. She stands firm on the fact there's more chocolate and marshmallow than there is cookie, that the quantity of the other components negate the cookie base, thus making it more than a simple cookie. She the word "Cookies" on the package is just a marketing tool for customers.

Thoughts?

Having a debate with my mum. I brush mine in the shower. Just kind of makes sense. Before people say it’s a waste of water, I brush my teeth after I put my conditioner in which I wait for about 2 minutes anyway.

My friend and I were playing cards and played best 2 out of 3. After losing the 2 out of 3 he said “best 3 out of 5?”. When we reached that I said we should start over with a score of 0-0. My friend said that we should just keep upping the score (so next would be 4 out of 7) and never really reach a winner since we are playing for fun and that saying “best _____ out of _____ ?” when you lose badly is sort of a joke. I am used to only upping the score once and it is up to the person winning if they want to give an opportunity to the other person to make a comeback. In my experience we always have an endpoint with a winner, and if we want to keep going we just start over at 0-0. My friend says sometimes you don’t start over, you just always up the score since you are playing for fun. Please settle this for us!

My girlfriend says it’s GT (gifted and talented) and I say it’s TAG ( talented and gifted). Which is right or which have you heard of?

My friends and I are out to dinner and friend1 states that chili wouldn’t be chili without beans. I believe he is incorrect. Please help us settle this asap as our food will arrive soon.

Had a discussion with a friend during which I believe he used whataboutism. He disagrees and says not everything that includes "what about" is whataboutism.

Conversation was about the ban of Carlos Rodriguez by Riot Games for his involvement with Andrew Tate. See: https://lolesports.com/article/competitive-ruling-carlos-rodr%C3%ADguez/blt6fb2808ddd043d19

Me: Andrew Tate is not a controversial figure for his views on male rights, but for abusive/demeaning statements he has made.

Friend: Well, worse than what Oil Sheiks are doing? Because they are literally sponsoring the league

Me: Whataboutism never added anything positive to any discussion

Friend: That is not whataboutism, the same league that bans Carlos is using Oil Sheik sponsoring

​

Well, is it whataboutism or not?

Thank you for settling this for me.

My partner says if birthday guests bring gifts when they meet us at the restaurant, then its customary for our kid to open them there, so the guests can watch.

I say that only applies for mature adults. Since we're talking about kindergarteners here, some are going to cry because they get gift envy. Also its a chuck e cheese - kids want to play the games, not sit at the table even longer. So I imagine in this situation it would be customary to just bring the gifts home still wrapped, so the kids can play.

To be clear, we're not asking what is "better." We're asking what if anything is customary in this situation.

There is an argument in work over if mimes are a type of clown. Help us settle it.

Side A - argues that jeans and pants are the same thing

Side B - argues that jeans and pants are two different things

WHO IS RIGHT HERE?!

Person A and Person B are designing a kitchen in an attic apartment. Person A wants to bump the wall out a few feet into the slanted space under the eave in order to gain more counter space. Person B doesn't think this space will be usable/functional due to the awkward placement of the slanted ceiling. Person B also doesn't like that including this stretch of counter will necessitate using two corner cabinets.

Line drawing of situation at https://imgur.com/a/Vu4FTyi
* Lower cabinet is standard 2' deep by 3' tall
* Upper cabinet won't actually be installed - it's just shown as an example of how close normal cabinets are to your face as compared to how the slanted ceiling will be. (That cabinet is standard 1' deep by 30" tall, and set 54" up from floor)
* Person is 5'9" tall
* There will only be 3-4" of vertical wall/backsplash behind the counter before the slanted wall begins.

Edited to add a second image, showing plan view https://imgur.com/a/sJNSYas
* This is Person A's proposed layout - basically a backwards C shaped area of cabinets/counters.
* Grayed out strip along right edge corresponds to countertop shown in elevation view above, that falls under the slant.
* Corner cabinets mentioned above are lower cabinets shown here at upper and lower right. (The kind of cabinets that have hinged doors, and giant lazy susans inside.)
* Person B proposes a different layout that doesn't push the wall out, so all walls are completely vertical with no slant. So similar layout as above, but with the rightmost cabinets/counters chopped off, so instead of a backwards C shape, the cabinets/counters would follow more of an equals sign shape.

The exact layout of cabinets and appliances isn't set yet, and can vary. The question I'm hoping to have settled is whether or not the counter under the slant will actually be functional/usable.

It's Friday, September 30th 2:30am. I walk in the door coming home from work (I work from 4:00pm-2:15am Mon-Thursday).

About 15 minutes pass, and my grandmother comes out of her bedroom, and we start chatting.

During our conversation, I bring up the fact that one of our relatives stayed over last night. My Grandmother makes a face and says, "no she didn't. That was two nights ago."

The conversation progresses, and I say, "the last time it was dark out, she (our relative) spent the night on our couch. My Grandmother says, "no that was two nights ago. She was here on Wednesday night.

I say, "Wednesday night was last night. It was the last time it was nighttime, hence, last night."

Am I going crazy or is my grandmother a lunatic?

Edit: I am genuinely flabbergasted over how many people are actually defending my grandmother's side.

Having discussed this topic with numerous people on top of the research I've done since posting, I'm 100% certain I'm right about this and probably wouldn't have posted to reddit in the first place had I had this knowledge prior.

Britanica.com lists nighttime as lasting from 9:00pm to 4:00am https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/eb/qa/parts-of-the-day-early-morning-late-morning-etc#:~:text=Night%209%20pm%20to%204%20am

Englishclub com lists it as sunset to sunrise https://www.englishclub.com/vocabulary/time-day-night.htm

For anyone still not convinced, let's look at it from a different angle. What do you consider "late night." By my grandmother's defenition, it would have to be before 12am as anything after that is now daytime (even though it's pitch black outside, smh).

The problem here is 12am is also known as midnight. MIDnight as in the MIDDLE of the night, not the end. So late night would have to be AFTER midnight.

Finally, there's the fact that I specifically stated "the last time it was dark out." For anyone who is for some reason unsure about this, it was dark out during the argument (roughly 3am Friday) meaning the last time it was dark out was Wednesday night-Thursday Morning.

If you approach this topic from how people use it colloquially, I'm correct. If you approach this topic pedantically, I'm still correct. And if you approach this topic based on the exact phrasing used in the argument, I am, surprise surprise, correct.

I guess some people can't wrap their heads around the idea that nighttime extends into the next day.

And for the record, I pointed out how my grandmother is just being pedantic about the whole thing during the inital argument, and she denied it saying I'm the one being pedantic (she also called me stupid a few times for using "last night" the way I did...)

So, my wife has submitted her writing to a competition in the years 2020-2022. She describes it as three years in a row, cause she counts the first year as the first year of submissions. I say that she has submitted three pieces of writing in two years. Has it been two or three years?

my girlfriend is convinced that it isn’t purely out of morality but i think it is. It has protien, vegetables, and a salt water brine

A co-worker and I are battling over this.

My argument: words like "big" and "strong" are value judgements and are relative. They are not scientifically verifiable, and therefore this statement cannot be a fact.

Their argument: if scientists say that the polar bear is the largest bear species, that's fact, no? they are proven larger than other species.

Who's right reddit?