Editing 1743: Coffee
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
Megan says she is a regular "Starbuck" after pouring the batch of coffee, believing the name of the cafe chain {{w|Starbucks}} to be synonymous with the actual job title "{{w|barista}}", further indicating a general lack of knowledge regarding the subject of coffee. The Starbucks coffee chain was loosely {{w|Starbucks#1970s|named after}} the fictional character {{w|List_of_Moby-Dick_characters#Mates|Starbuck}} from the book {{w|Moby Dick}}, so she could be referring to this, although Starbuck had nothing to do with coffee brewing! The third possible interpretation is that Megan is unaware of the reason for Starbucks' naming and thought that it was the possessive "Starbuck's" and that the founder was named Starbuck. See more [[#Trivia|trivia about Starbuck]] below. | Megan says she is a regular "Starbuck" after pouring the batch of coffee, believing the name of the cafe chain {{w|Starbucks}} to be synonymous with the actual job title "{{w|barista}}", further indicating a general lack of knowledge regarding the subject of coffee. The Starbucks coffee chain was loosely {{w|Starbucks#1970s|named after}} the fictional character {{w|List_of_Moby-Dick_characters#Mates|Starbuck}} from the book {{w|Moby Dick}}, so she could be referring to this, although Starbuck had nothing to do with coffee brewing! The third possible interpretation is that Megan is unaware of the reason for Starbucks' naming and thought that it was the possessive "Starbuck's" and that the founder was named Starbuck. See more [[#Trivia|trivia about Starbuck]] below. | ||
β | This method of making coffee would be very expensive as it would most likely destroy the vacuum-cleaner canister and filter. If the vacuum cleaner had ever been used, then it would not be very hygienic either, although if it had not been used then the floor would probably also be very unhygienic anyway. Since the plastic from the canister has probably also gone into contact with the sludge after being heated over open fire, there is a high risk that this "coffee" is actually poisonous for more than one reason. | + | This method of making coffee would be very expensive as it would most likely destroy the vacuum-cleaner canister and filter. If the vacuum cleaner had ever been used, then it would not be very hygienic either, although if it had not been used then the floor would probably also be very unhygienic anyway. On the other hand floors are always unhygienic. Since the plastic from the canister has probably also gone into contact with the sludge after being heated over open fire, there is a high risk that this "coffee" is actually poisonous for more than one reason. |
The title text refers to the expense of replacing the "filter", as vacuum-cleaner filters are considerably more costly than single-use coffee filters. | The title text refers to the expense of replacing the "filter", as vacuum-cleaner filters are considerably more costly than single-use coffee filters. |