Probably with their pie cutter.

Why does this site use cookies?

Pick me up

People aren’t reading the article apparently based on the questions about Wash.

The animated series would be set between the events of the 2002 series and the 2005 big-screen continuation, Serenity

Yeah, but the wampa never acted again, so I think justice was done. Their career is over.

My best guess is it’s pulling in Google Business listings. A business, or SEO, either didn’t harmonize the naming schemes for all locations or there are duplicate listings with varied naming conventions that are still out there that get displayed.

And if you draft all of your political enemies to be the bulk of your military force, you’re giving them the training and the weaponry/keys to everything that allows them to go ahead with a coup.

That’s a bold strategy. They’re kind of fucked in both scenarios.

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker

“Somehow, Palpatine returned.”

Is that because Noem murdered it?

And the two shows are connected in the same universe!

Yeah, seeing later seasons of B5 and going back to S1 would be jarring! The acting and set up would be weird after seeing all that comes after it and how they up the ante each season.

Weird. I’ve had Voyager since being on Lemmy and I think it always showed the total as default. I didn’t even know one could separate them. 🤣

I feel like it works exactly as it does if they were separated. More positive number is a positive reaction/comment and more negative gets others piling on.

No, lifting an original vehicle type doesn’t change its type unless we collectively decide as a society or industry that it does. Your point is true for first generation Foresters. It’s not for today’s, though, which mine is as a 2025.

I’m not sure what you’re trying to argue or trying to get me to change my mind about it, but a crossover is literally an SUV by today’s standards. Definitions change and there are a multitude of articles that discuss this.

“…over time, crossover came to refer predominantly to unibody-based SUVs. The term SUV is often used as an umbrella term for both crossovers and traditional SUVs due to the similarities between them.”

Like I said, if you want to disagree then fine. I’m not changing my stance because there are plenty of articles from the industry that support my point about crossovers being an SUV.

I do appreciate you having me think more about this though! It’s an interesting discussion.

Yeah. The Sonata is a fairly big for a mid-size sedan.

I guess when I say size it’s a combo of length and width but also height. Ground clearance is a big one.

My point is they specifically called out SUVs and only SUVs. You are making my point right here that the issue isn’t SUVs but likely size and efficiency of the vehicle. I just thought calling out only SUVs was a weird broad criticism.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

I’m curious though, what in your mind makes a Forester an SUV rather than a wagon? Disregard any external labels that others have applied. How you would classify the vehicle.

Great question. I’ve never really thought about that, but I’d probably say size and design (boxy-ish looks). Beyond that, categorization by the companies making and rating them is what I go by.

But it does mean that the “sedan vs SUV” MPG comparison is obfuscated by a faulty premise.

What faulty premise? Do mid size and large sedans have fuel efficiency and vehicle length that cross into the small and mid size SUV range? I compared them because the original comment was essentially “I hope the high gas really fucks SUVs”. Why SUVs specifically? Which SUVs? No mention of large sedans, trucks, vans, etc.

My comparison was to point out that a singular broad criticism was sort of a weird idea when there are so many other factors.

Well, I disagree with your argument about SUV classification so we will agree to disagree here.

I think my issue is that SUV efficiency is a range just like sedans are a range, trucks, vans, compacts, etc. So at what point is it really fuck this type of car versus fuck vehicles that have this specific fuel efficiency.

My entire point was the person I replied to said fuck SUVs and AI. Hey, I get it but SUVs aren’t the problem, vehicle efficiency is and many classes cross over into that “fuck this” point. That’s really the crux of my first reply here was that it was a broad stroke and if you’re going to say fuck something because of its contribution then maybe don’t be so broad and targeted?

I’m saying person I responded to made a blanket statement about people owning a broad category of car. I pointed out that there are nuances and taking on particular broad group isn’t probably the right take. Using broad strokes is bad.

I’m not really sure what your stake is in being angry with your replies. If that isn’t your intent, that’s how it is coming across.

I used American SUVs because I was trying to talk about American buyers since this seemed to be aimed at the USA with the mention of gallons (yeah, other counties use it, but come on…we know it was meant towards the USA). Yes, I misused what I was trying to say.

A Forester is still an SUV. It’s classified as an SUV whether you like it or not. A crossover SUV is still an SUV. It’s a subclass, but falls under the umbrella.

Sonata: 25/37 Forester: 26/33

They are fairly close in stats.

Look, I get what you’re saying. The whole thing is these vehicles are a range and people are driving what they can. To just give a blanket “fuck these people for this broad category” seems weird to me.

I am merely pointing out nuances and I don’t understand what is triggering some people to turn into a hostile jack ass for pointing something out. 🤷‍♂️