The initial headline on our recent Dodge Charger post, “Dodge Will Pay Current Charger Drivers $8,500 To Try The Electric Daytona,” was misleading and inaccurate, and we’re here to tell you that, even though it was unintentional, we know it was unacceptable, and we’ll do whatever we can to prevent it in the future. So let’s talk about it.
Dear readers, one of you just pointed me to the Dodge Charger post from yesterday, and I’ll come right out and say it: Though I was not the writer or editor, I am the EIC of this site, so every failure falls on my shoulders. This post — a really simple story whose facts should have been easy to get right — was a failure, and I’m sorry.
The article mentioned that current lessees can get a new Dodge Charger Daytona EV with a $7500 Federal EV rebate plus $1,000 loyalty cash (“2024 Returning Lessee Private Offer”) — so $8,500 off in total. That’s good scratch. The problem was that our headline, mentioned in the first line of this article, implied that all of that money was coming from Dodge, which is not accurate.
In fact, the $7500 figure, the Federal EV rebate, applies to many other cars, so to imply that somehow Dodge Charger Daytona EV buyers would be getting $8,500 off would, in many readers’ eyes, imply that this figure was in addition to the EV rebate. It is not. It’s just $1,000 of loyalty cash to current lessees on top of the same rebate everybody else is getting. What’s more, the original headline didn’t make it clear that the $1,000 applied only to Dodge lessees.
Many of you called us out in the comments, and rightly so. We all have high expectations for this site’s editorial quality, so when sloppiness like this slips through, it’s a big deal, and one that we take very seriously. Thank you for keeping us on the ball; it shows you care, and it shows you know we can do better.
We have a typical two-pronged approach to blog publication — both the author and editor are responsible for making sure stories are accurate and that they strike the right tone. For both prongs to break down is a rarity, but one that we need to protect against. We have an ultra-talented team of smart and well-intentioned folks here at The Autopian, but we’re all fallible, and it’s clear that the more we can account for that fallibility in our article-production process, the better. Toyota does it in the Toyota Production System, so we can do it here.
Thank you all for your feedback, and if you have more in the future please email me directly at david@theautopian.com.
This is still the best damn car site on the interwebs. The whole crew is top-notch because they actually care about cars, readers and writing. Sláinte is táinte.
I dunno how anyone else read that headline but I read it as Dodge would throw a stack of 85 Benjamins at anyone who pulled up in a Dodge Charger to test drive a new electric Daytona whether they signed the paperwork or dropped the tester’s keys in the toilet.
Kinda made me wish I had a Charger.
(But not really).
Yeah, that was my take as well…. that they’d pay you that if you were a current owner who was just willing to test drive the thing. (Which, obviously, can’t be true, hence the reason I was like, “Wait, what?”) But, as others have said, I really respect and appreciate this group’s ability and willingness to admit when they mess up and own it.
I greatly respect publications that take their corrections seriously. Well done, Autopian crew.
This.
Humans are fallible, and mistakes will happen. Real journalists will correct those mistakes on the front page. This is part of why I’m happy to support this site.
I know not everyone can be perfect like me. I appreciate those that admit it. Lol
Hey, admitting you have a problem is the first step to redemption! Just kidding but good on you to recognize it and confirm that you’re not heading toward the way sites such as J… and T…. are run.
Keep it up, so far so good!
And perhaps “try” was not the right verb either? Purchase? Buy?
Exactly. “Try” is just as incorrect as the implication that all the money came from Dodge. Perhaps even more so.
I was paid $25 to try a Ford, they literally gave me a check for $25 to test drive a car back in the 1990s. No purchase necessary. I got a $50 savings bond from another company for doing the same thing. And IIRC, another $25 or so from Buick. I took advantage of around six or seven of these offers while shopping for a new car.
No harm, no foul. Just send me a check for $8500, I don’t have to call your mother, and we can put all this ugliness behind us.
Seriously, thanks for writing this.
Send a title to your charger and it’s a deal
One (a couple) slightly even laster thoughts:
1. Peter said he really just misunderstood it at first, which is worlds away from “omg 8500 to switch.” I think many of us are on sort of high alert because we’ve seen a place or two that would know it was wrong and run it anyway, and we’re nervous that The Autopian might follow that dumb, angrifying path. That’s a good segue into
2. Which is that this post, editors in the comments, the accountability is phenomenal and appreciated. It’s likely not enough to defuse the now-perpetual tension we all feel to call bullshit before considering other options, because there are a lot of places trying to sell us bullshit. I’ve been watching CNN’s website run A/B tests on headlines and even change URLs to bury ledes and encourage emotional responses and clicking through rather than concise communication, and they’re not remotely the only ones. We as readers feel defensive, but that’s no excuse to go crazy about the death of the site (I don’t think so) or the quality of staff (high). I apologize if I was ungracious in calling it out, and maybe, at least on this tiny little slice of Internet, we’ll learn to be a little kinder and assume the best when we see things that seem off.
The level of that intentional idiocy in the establishment press is off the charts. And they compound it by refusing to admit it.
This was a mistake but not the result of an agenda, and taking responsibility is the right way to go.
Could not have been addressed better. An example for others to follow. and they won’t
Thanks David! I said this in the response to Peter Viera as well, but I really appreciate as a reader that you and the team care enough to own mistakes and fix them. The fact that I got a response to my comment on that post, regardless of my membership status, has in fact, pushed me over the edge. I owe it to you guys to sign up and put my money where my mouth is. I’ll be taking care of that this weekend. Thanks again, to you, and the whole Autopian.
I’ll be laughing my ass off when in 12 months Dodge is offering $8500 on top of the $7500.
Cuz they gotta! I don’t wish them ill but the electric Charger is a seriously risky move.
I mean to be fair, the OEM does not have to pass that 7,500 along to you(or at least didn’t have to last time I was shopping)
For a lot of plugin hybrids, the manufacturer pockets the credit. I know when I got my Wrangler 4xe one of the big factors was you could lease it and Stellantis would apply the credit to your lease whereas many other EV/PHEV options definitely did not pass the savings along.
One last thought: can we get Mea Cupra tag?
I love that.
Check now, just made one!
Hahaaaa! I love it. Who says owning up to things can’t still be a little fun?
Now you’re just gonna start making minor mistakes so you can own up and get maximum use out of the tag.
I’m not against this, of course.
Is it sad that I didn’t doubt it, though? That Stellantis would preemptively discount the unreleased vehicle?
It would not exactly be surprising if it was true. I don’t know if it would be a smart move or just desparate.
I am glad to see your apology. It is good to see you understand how folks were unhappy with the article title. It was clearly misleading.
When The Autopian launched, I was excited at the way everyone seemed to be welcome to the table – the idea of a place for all car enthusiasts to gather and talk about their love of cars. But that last while I have been getting irritated and frustrated with this site and have actually gone days without bothering to visit – which is a big change.
The article titles have definitely become more click bait prone or, in some way worse, basically telling folks about how there is only one correct way to make a car. The Scout avalanche of articles was a tipping point for me and how I view this site. It has nothing to actually with the overload of articles. It was the incessant preaching that the EREV was bees knees of cars and that building an EV only vehicle is inferior in every way. The excessive use of the holy grail mantra further engrained that if you did not agree with the EREV mania you were not correct (or more to the point an idiot) and you are no longer welcome.
The idea of this being a place for all car enthusiasts is dead to me. I absolutely adore my 2012 Ford Focus EV that I have owned since new. But constantly seeing writers preach that even 220 miles in not enough range for an EV is tiring and very misguided. The Ford EV has been so ridiculously inexpensive to operate and use as my urban city car, but hey, it apparently it is a POS since it does not get 400 miles of range. Sigh.
The constant preaching that PHEV/EREVs are the superior and only car that you should consider is also tiring and simply exhausting to listen to ad nauseum. And this is from a person that loves my 2018 Hyundai Ioniq PHEV… it is a great car. But PHEV are not the solution for everyone and all applications. For folks that do only urban city driving (like I do with the Ford EV) they are actually not, IMHO, the best solution. But I sure don’t feel like any writers here with the constant PHEV/EREV is the only way articles being published.
Finally, Jason’s article mocking the choice of Hyundai making Hydrogen Fuel Cell CONCEPT car was just more salt on the wound. I suspect I am the only person here to have driven a Ford Hydrogen Full cell car on city streets. I was able to get in an event put together for dignitaries from around the world attending a new energy symposium. I was certainly not a dignitary, but I was invited by a fried working at the hydrogen fueling company hosting the event. I hopped into one of the demo cars and looked at the obviously wildly bored Ford Engineer (an honest to goodness person that actively developed the cars.) I looked at him, smiled and asked it I could hoon the crap out of the car. He laughed and said go for it. I peeled out of the lot with the wheels spinning and smoking away with a big grin on my face. The engineer perked up and realized I was a car nut and answered all sorts of technical questions while I ripped around corners. I asked stuff like why the brakes were pulsing weirdly under some braking situations and he said they were still trying to tune the regenerative breaking properly. After the drive I immediately asked to crack open the hood and look at the fuel cell in the trunk (and to hell with the dignitaries waiting to do a slow test drive… they got to wait). He truly enjoyed me asking why the hell the thing had one honking huge radiator and him getting to explain why in great technical detail! (Quick reason, the process of pushing hydrogen over the fuel cell membrane creates electricity and water but also generates a LOT of heat. So no need for a heat pump or electric heater as the fuel cell provides heat.)
But an article essentially telling me that I am wrong to think hydrogen cars are freaking cool and could be useful in some applications. Nope, apparently Hyundai was utterly stupid to make a Hydrogen Fuel cell car. Alas, the mocking of building a hydrogen car seems perfectly fine here.
I love cars. All types of cars. I have never made fun or mocked a persons car choice – I ask genuinely how they like their car and what makes it special for them. But I feel like this site is becoming an echo chamber where you are being told what you should like. EREV is the “holy grail” and the only solution. Hydrogen Fuel Cell cars are stupid. EVs that don’t get 400 miles are stupid and useless. The preaching is getting way too tiring.
I’m sorry this is so long, this is definitely a dump of my frustration with this site. It is no longer fun for me since there seems to be snarky put downs happening in way too many articles lately.
Hm. I don’t see it the same way you do.
Range Anxiety is real. Reporting on it does not make it hate that something doesn’t have 400 miles when it is the market that (irrationally) demands it (or says they do in polls)
The Scout was news.
Period.
It excited the EIC, who pointed out why he liked it. It doesn’t mean the Lightning or Rivian are bad trucks, but at least half of them aren’t moving as expected, necessitating a two month shutdown.
Look, I won’t try to change your mind; I know better than to argue with strangers on the internet. Just consider this: The same way it is impossible to ‘Leave no Child Behind’, it is also impossible to have a car site for ALL enthusiasts.
I will grant you this, though. I will go and see if I see the same mockery in the fuel cell article.
Be back soon…
I’ll talk about the mockery in the fuel cell article with a detailed explanation so I can explain my thinking.
“Hyundai Shows Off A Great New Look In A Hydrogen Concept For No Good Reason”
What was the need for the bolded text? Seriously, why diss a cool concept just because it is hydrogen? What value did it add to the discussion? The bulk of the article went into detail about the design yet somehow they had to do that… it was a click baiting, snarky, microaggression.
Better title: “Hyundai Shows Off A Great New Look In A Concept Car”
of you could be teasing then do something cheeky like:
“Hyundai Shows Off A Great New Look In A Concept Car With One Bizarre choice”
That title would be was more appropriate while enticing the reader to click through.
That simple change would have done a way better selling of the article in a friendlier manner. Words matter if you wan to be inviting and welcoming to everyone.
The bulk of the article was fun talking about the design elements in the concept car. But then things got off track with the last 4 paragraphs. It was an oft-repeated rant about how hydrogen fuel cell cars are useless and horrible to own. What was the goal there? What value did it add to the discussion? I think most folks were clicking through to look at the design elements.
It was tiring and annoying to see the snark a the end of the article. A lot of Autopian articles are being excessively snarky with no added value. That is what happened with the decline of Jalopnik where for a period of time the articles were loathsome crap.
All fair points and I grant you every one of them.
I think what we are seeing is an iteration of the endless battle between art and commercialism. Art usually gets its ass kicked. A shame, but the reality of hosting a website and paying people is real. It will turn some people off when the art is no longer pure, as I see it seems to have for you.
I kinda get what Blah is getting at though. The tone of some articles recently have been on the verge of condescending mocking, even if sometimes done sarcastically.
Woah, Nelly. A lot of frustration here. I wouldn’t say that this site says that EREV’s are the only solution, but they are excited about them. Why? Most American’s aren’t comfortable with a full BEV (especially when it comes to Trucks/SUV’s). Why? Because you either need a giant wasteful battery to get meaningful range, or you will be going no where near nowhere (which is kind of part of the fun of having an offroader). David has an EREV and a love of offroaders, and the Scout is novel in that way. Looks pretty cool to me, though they look enormous.
The use of the word “Holy Grail” is probably overused, but in most cases, to someone, it is their Holy Grail. For me, it’s the Volvo V60 R-Design from 2015/2016 (only a few hundred made) with the 3.0 I-6 or the Toyota Trekker (only 1500-2500 made).
Hydrogen is an awesome technology, but they aren’t much use when there is literally no infrastructure for it. I wish everyone would go that route, but it doesn’t seem incredibly viable.
I love the Autopian, and hope that they do their best to stay out of politics or remain as neutral as possible.
Thank you for the feedback. I can understand one might think we’re heavy on the EREV love. Much of that is because I drive one daily, and I think it’s awesome and really doesn’t get enough love as a technology. They truly are a fantastic solution that I think is under-appreciated.
But the truth is, we love all cars, and we rarely ever denounce a car — in fact, we have an entire series in which we redeem cars that folks have ripped on! We love talking about the beauty of the Ford C-Max and Fusion Hybrid and Kia Niro Hybrid, about how great the new Equinox EV is, I even kinda liked the Cybertruck and Fisker! I actually enjoyed driving the Hydrogen Toyota Mirai!
Anyone is welcome to like whatever car they want, because the authors here certainly do. From Smart cars to Willys Jeeps to Matt’s Honda CR-V Hybrid, to my BMW i3 REV, to Jason’s YUGO (lol) to Thomas’ Boxster, etc. From BEV to gas to REx to hybrid to hydrogen to steam cars — we don’t kink shame!
But just know that we’re listening, and we’re just appreciative you’re here to voice your feedback. Thank you!
I fully get the greatness of EREV and PHEV cars. As already discussed I have the great Hyundai Ioniq PHEV. It is awesome. It is hard to explain how great of a experience PHEV’s are, I get it. My friends just see a simple looking sedan and their eyes quickly gloss over when I get into details.
I did manage to convert one friend that borrowed the car when they visited recently. They absolutely raved about how little gas they used driving several 100 miles and were just blown away with experience. Yes, they raved about PHEVs as much as you did. So one person converted is a win I guess.
But, I’m truly concerned with the unnecessary snarkiness that seems to becoming rather normal for articles here. It makes this place unwelcoming for those that just want to talk about cars with some bizarre need to dump on things. Please take the time to read my response to Crimedogs in this same thread about what bothered me about Jason’s article about the Hyundai Concept car article. It is fine balancing act I know, but guiding articles to be less snarky and negative and friendly can make a big difference in perceptions and enjoyment.
One thing I’d like to share is this section of The Autopian Style Guide:
We live by that^. Sure, sometimes an author will have a strong opinion on something (Jason has strong opinions on things like Level 2 semi-autonomous driving systems and hydrogen cars, I have strong opinions on EREVs, etc.), but another part of our Style Guide outlines the importance of voice. If an author has an opinion, and it’s based largely in fact, then to smother that would be to infringe upon that author’s voice. We try not to do that around here (unless the author write something insulting/threatening, in which case we put the kibosh on that), because that’s key to making us unique. Of course, the flip side with voicey/opinion-y things is that some may not like it. Take my timing belt story; I stand by that, and I’d write it again, but some folks are of different mind, and they got upset. That’s just part of the game.
But anyway, just know that ^Avoid The ‘Pointless Negativity’ Crutch is a key pillar of our operation, and has been since day one. In fact, pretty much every major element of how we operate has remained the same, so if it feels like things are “changing,” just know that it’s not our writers/editors/process. It’s the same ol’ Autopian, but we’re always writing about new things, particularly things that relate to current happenings.
(With that said, we’re going to make sure to pay close attention to tone at all times ensure we’re continuing to follow that pillar outlined in the Style Guide).
This is why the Autopian is top tier journalism, you listen to your audience and stick to the truth and journalistic integrity even if it costs you ad money.
Most news sites would be shaking in their boots at the thought of apologizing, many wouldn’t even admit fault. I remember authors attacking Commenters on j___k.
You are the best.
It’s nice to say each author has a voice. (I prefer the word style myself.) But when to use those opinions is the key between pandering self-serving writing an actually writing a story. I will apologize that I keep circling back to Jason’s Hyundai Hydrogen concept car article, but that is top of mind and an easy way to illustrate what I find tiring and just inappropriate here at times.
Take the title: Hyundai Shows Off A Great New Look In A Hydrogen Concept For No Good Reason
Using the “pointless negativity” guideline, that title does not, in my opinion, pass the sniff test. Actually, in my world, it is the very definition of pointless negativity. The article was about discussing the design of a CONCEPT car.
It is not even a production car. It is a freaking concept car.
If this was a test drive review of an actual car that they were selling, then yes, I think it would be fine to talk about the choice of choosing hydrogen fuel cell. But you can’t even drive this car. It was showing off concept design language for Hyundai… which what the article did a good job discussing. I even enjoyed the classic roasting of the press release language with Jason’s trademark “voice.” It was perfectly appropriate as the article was about design.
The last four paragraphs is that I found so unfortunate and left me scratching my head and asking why? That part of the article, for me, is definitely “pointless negativity”. It did nothing to move the story being told forward.
In the end, I’m just one customer and that’s my opinion. Thanks for responding and being thoughtful and classy about this.
It’s possible we won’t entirely agree on this one, since I think for Jason to voice his bafflement on the continued investment of what he sees as a dead-end/at-the-very-least-currently-inferior-technology is fair enough. But I can see how he easily could have just focused entirely on the car’s rather interesting design and not mentioned his opinion on hydrogen tech at all. Jason is pretty passionate about it, as you can see!
And likewise, thank you for your feedback. I totally understand the perspective, and it’s valid.
I agree David’s over zealous preaching of EREVs has become tiring.
I’ve heard similar things about my writing about Jeeps, my writing about my i3, the use of “Holy Grail,” etc.
I totally get it; sometimes I really latch onto things I’m really into.
EREV stories will continue, because they’re underrepresented in the media space, and because I’m passionate about them, just as I am about rusty Jeeps and grails and i3s, etc.
You are, of course, welcome to skip stories you’re not interested in!
Addendum:
Again, I can totally see how I might come across as a bit overpassionate about this topic. I think this is simply a response to me reading what I see as insufficiently-thought-out pieces on EREVs, but largely it’s just me truly believing that EREVs will be a significant benefit to the consumer, the automaker, and the environment alike.
Luckily, Scout has been listening (the brand invited me to their event in part because they’d read my stories on EREVs), and it looks like others are listening, as well. These responses are exactly the reason why I’m so vocal.
But, once more, I totally get how it can become tiring!
I am glad just to see a second offering in a form that matters to me. I put down $100 for the RamCharger, but have zero confidence in Ram to get it right. So, I put down $100 for Scout, though I didn’t realize how huge it was.
Now I am wondering, do I lease the Ram for two years and get a Scout when it is available?
EREV does meet my want for a truck form factor and my use case for towing 1-2 times a month.
My strategy is to drive a gas truck until I’m convinced someone has gotten a PHEV one right. Sadly, Ram and VW are the last two manufacturers I would look to for getting it right, so I’m hoping Ford/GM/Toyota are working on something that they’ll announce closer to availability than Ram or Scout did.
Understood. I hadn’t considered the bones would be VW; In my head, Rivian would contribute more.
I guess my head was wrong, as that is really just an electronics/brain agreement.
Dang.
My understanding was that the Rivian deal is only for software. You might get a Rivian-like head unit, but the rest will be VW.
Yes I am welcome to skip reading stories that don’t interest me/seem likely to annoy rather than entertain and inform, and I do, unfortunately increasingly. I chose for example to not click on the Hyundai Hydrogen article and that seems like it was a good choice based on the things I’ve read in this thread.
I’ve got no issue with EREV articles, it is the preachy tone that gets tiring as does the negativity crutch like this article https://www.theautopian.com/americas-plug-in-hybrids-arent-good-enough/#:~:text=Many%20of%20these%20cars%20don,home%2Dwork%2Dhome%20commute. Your conclusion wasn’t really supported by the facts that you presented. With the average commute being between 12 and 16 miles that means most of the vehicles on the list you presented would do the trick for the “average” commuter and all those less than average commuter. Even if they don’t provide 100% EV commute for every owner the fact that they use less battery capacity means that 2-3 people getting 75% of their miles as EV does more than 1 person doing 100% in a EREV, or 5-7 people do 50% of their commute miles on EV does more than 1 person doing a similar commute in a 300mi EV.
Username checks out
Your comment made me laugh. Yes, I am not capable of short pithy comments. I am not wired for the Internet age apparently with 30 second TikToks and short biting commentary. Shoot… I did it again blathering on.
🙂
Don’t ever stop.
While I don’t actively praise people for correctly using adverbs, adjectives, coherent thoughts, and compound-complex sentences, I appreciate the ability to create well-formed thoughts and to communicate the same. Seeing slang, incorrect subject-verb agreement, or a lack of punctuation makes me shift into bias about someone’s intelligence. It isn’t right; I know.
Still, I would prefer to discuss with you than anyone at the J-site (which I can no longer log on to as there does not appear to be an ‘X’ option any more. RIP Crimedog)
The problem with hydrogen isn’t the vehicle using it in itself, it’s the primary means of production (which can be done with renewables), transport, and storage (much greater challenge both for distribution and use cases). There’s a reason there’s such limited investment in it in spite it being otherwise potentially appealing to Big Oil or anyone invested in ICE tech or even old cars as they could be converted to run on it to be massively cleaner at the tailpipe. I’d love to see someone come up with solutions for these challenges, but like fusion and solid state batteries, they always seem to be 5-10 years away.
I’m glad you wrote this, because my immediate reaction when I saw the original headline was to wonder where the price would land after stacking the $8500 and the tax credit. Not that I qualified for the money off or was particularly interested, but still.
$1K is nothing for the CEO (Not pictured here), they could do better. Love the transparency of this site. They missed an extra zero on that loyalty cash.
+1 for transparency
+1 for corrections
-1 because it’s a story about a car I can’t afford anyway and I take that personally
Fair.
My personal apologies – I will contribute $10 for every member who buys a new Charger Daytona lol
I just bought 6 of them
Look at mister big shot here waving his $20 around
Wow, telling the truth, now that’s a concept MANY have blown right past this year(s).
Hats off to you and the team at the Autopian!
You can call it the ‘Topian Production System and send memos to one another re: putting new cover sheets on the TPS reports. 🙂 (Pop culture pop quiz!)
In seriousness, I appreciate the effort you (collectively) put into the site and how you strive to provide high quality content.
He has people skills!!
Ah. Yeah… It’s just we’re putting new coversheets on all the clickbait-y headlines. So, if you could go ahead and try to remember to attach those coversheets or just avoid clickbait headlines from now on, that’d be great. All right!
Also, from here on out I’ll just be the new guy in charge at NCIS… ????
DT. We will still read, and would probably read even more without the damned click bait shit. Really.
Give it a try please.
It takes a big person to admit you are wrong. It also is nice when a boss takes responsibility for mistakes made, instead of throwing employees under the bus. Too many bosses try to weasel out of doing their jobs, which is monitoring employees. People make mistakes. A good boss helps them rectify mistakes.
Trying to imagine a post like this on other sites I’ve frequented in the past, and coming up short. Thank you for that.
As always, my criticism is constructive, unless it’s of jellybean F150 takes.
I just saw an extended-cab, two-door jellybean Harley edition F-150 and thought “Yeah, that’s the good stuff.”
Were you drunk?
I’m sure the owner parks it next to his 10K mile C5 (convertible, auto, naturally) in his meticulous garage.
Peak Boomer energy.
TBH, this bit
“We have an ultra-talented team of smart and well-intentioned folks here at The Autopian”
Should read
“We have an ultra-talented team of smart and well-intentioned folks at The Autopian, and Peter also works here.”
I always knew you were the nefarious, ill-intentioned one.
There’s two of us! Two!
You beat me to it!! 😛
CORRECTION INCOMING – “We have an ultra-talented team of smart and well-intentioned folks at The Autopian, and Peter and Rivers also work here.”
Untrue, but hilarious.
They DON’T work there?!? 😮
Not anymore!
Noooooo
Normally I would say its okay, at least it proves that you are all human here. But then, AI has been making stuff up now. So are we human? What are we? How do I work this? Where is that large automobile? This is not my beautiful house. This is not my beautiful wife.
Let the water hold you down, sir.
It’s possible we’re Dancer. Or Denser. Or…whatever.
If it is Denser, then the water really will hold you down
Is it not also possible we’re Denso?
Genius.
I have to admit, I saw a reference to the Hawk Tuah girl in yesterday’s Halloween article yesterday and paused for a moment to check who it was written by. If the byline was David Tracy, I would have known it was AI generated.
Where’s the bathroom at? Beavis
I appreciate the transparency. Screwups are going to happen, so how you respond is what defines your character.
I noticed that yesterday but didn’t bring it up because I didn’t want to interrupt what I assumed was a(nother) fabulous expense account lunch that you made some staffer drive you to because the wine was too good to just have one glass, which would also explain how the error got through.
I haven’t gone THAT Hollywood.
Yet.
It’s only 12:15.
You’re right. That’s an expense account brunch, not lunch.
Uh… two words: sonic bath. Yeah, you done gone Hollywood.
But, you started with the needle firmly in frozen rusty junk hellscape, so a large correction the other direction was to be expected before settling somewhere in the middle somewhat normal area