thats because women don't exist. there is OnlyDicks

holy fuck, the lengths you're going to just to avoid acknowledging what actually happened are incredible.

you conveniently stopped at "what really pissed me off though was this one kid" and left out the part immediately afterward where i explicitly described him grabbing the handlebars and trying to climb onto my scooter. funny how that works, isn't it? you literally have to cut my explanation in half to make your version of events sound believable.

and another thing, since apparently reading comprehension is such a struggle here, those were words i used in a reddit post describing an incident that pissed me off. i didn't walk outside and start calling children "little shits" to their faces. you're taking language from an angry retelling and presenting it as though that's what i actually said to them.

what actually happened was that one kid out of three tried climbing onto my expensive scooter while it was sitting on its kickstand. the other two weren't a problem. i went outside and sternly told him to get off and leave it alone. yes, i raised my voice enough to be heard. i didn't stand there screaming at three children or go on some unhinged tirade. you're the one who is doing that for me.

i don't owe a kid a fucking guided tour of my scooter after catching him trying to climb onto it without permission either. what kind of ridiculous expectation is that? i'm supposed to stand there answering questions and being an "ambassador for the hobby" while some random kid treats my property like playground equipment? give me a break. there's a time for being friendly and there's a time for correcting behaviour before somebody gets hurt or something gets damaged.

as for the legality of my scooter, what the fuck does that have to do with this situation? whether a particular scooter complies with road regulations is an entirely separate question from whether someone has permission to climb onto it. it was parked, powered off and locked. its potential top speed doesn't magically make it public property. and if you're so concerned about safety, you should be the first person recognizing why a child shouldn't be climbing onto a heavy motorized vehicle sitting on a kickstand.

i've already acknowledged that my original post was angry and that i could have used better language. that's literally why i edited it. but apparently acknowledging that isn't good enough for you. you'd rather keep exaggerating the incident until it resembles something completely different.

and the hypocrisy is still hilarious. you've repeatedly called me a cunt, accused me of lying, invented details about my behaviour, and now you're trying to diagnose me with anger issues based on a fucking reddit exchange. all while presenting yourself as some authority on maturity and appropriate social interactions.

if you want to criticize the language i used in my original post, go right ahead. there's a legitimate discussion to be had there. but stop pretending that a stern reprimand for physically interfering with someone else's property is the same thing as screaming abuse at innocent children for being curious.

you've spent this entire exchange arguing against a version of events that exists largely in your own imagination. and the fact that you have to keep distorting what happened to maintain your moral high ground says a hell of a lot more about your argument than it does about me.

edit: the fact that you reduced this to "what harm did they do besides get some grease on the grips?" is exactly the problem i'm talking about.

there's a massive difference between a kid admiring someone's scooter and physically grabbing the handlebars and trying to climb onto it without permission.

we're talking about a roughly $7,000 machine that weighs a considerable amount and is capable of 120 km/h. if the kid had knocked it off its kickstand, he could have seriously injured himself, damaged the scooter, or both.

the fact that nothing serious happened doesn't mean the behaviour was acceptable. you don't wait until someone damages your property or gets hurt before intervening.

and yes, they're children. that's precisely why they need to be taught boundaries and why powerful electric scooters shouldn't be treated like playground equipment.

could i have been calmer? sure. but that doesn't make me wrong for immediately stopping someone from climbing onto my property. and calling me a cunt while lecturing me about how to speak to other people is a pretty remarkable contradiction.

be mindful that it could have went the other way around.

enjoy jail racist pos idiot

you reek of racism-victim mentality

Says they are 'Canadian' but all the clothing is manufactured overseas. Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and Cambodia. Slave labor.

Anyone want to know how much of a profit roughly they are making?

I searched the public trade database, Volza, and it lists Vietnam-to-Canada shipments dated May 20, 2025, explicitly described as Manmade-brand underwear, 91% modal and 9% elastane.

There was two shipments where they bought combined quantity of 58,469 units at $3.25 a piece.

Do the math. They charge $24 for a single pair of briefs and buy them for $3.25 each. Thats a 638% markup. How Canadian of them.

The "roughly ten months of development and dozens of revisions before launching the boxer brief" remains a company claim.

Their FAQ says design happens in Montreal. However, those sources don’t establish that every technical contribution happened in Canada, or identify every contributor’s nationality.

Their development story doesn’t prove that the underwear is uniquely innovative, superior to cheaper alternatives, or worth the premium either.

Says they are 'Canadian' but all the clothing is manufactured overseas. Sri Lanka, Vietnam, and Cambodia. Slave labor.

Anyone want to know how much of a profit roughly they are making?

I searched the public trade database, Volza, and it lists Vietnam-to-Canada shipments dated May 20, 2025, explicitly described as Manmade-brand underwear, 91% modal and 9% elastane.

There was two shipments where they bought combined quantity of 58,469 units at $3.25 a piece.

Do the math. They charge $24 for a single pair of briefs and buy them for $3.25 each. Thats a 638% markup. How Canadian of them.

The "roughly ten months of development and dozens of revisions before launching the boxer brief" remains a company claim.

Their FAQ says design happens in Montreal. However, those sources don’t establish that every technical contribution happened in Canada, or identify every contributor’s nationality.

Their development story doesn’t prove that the underwear is uniquely innovative, superior to cheaper alternatives, or worth the premium either.

maximize profit ≠ benefit canadians

i sense AI was also used to write this post....

r/therewasanattempt

next time just ghost. don't even waste your breath.

it was two little scoops with a teaspoon and not intentional :(

you got 4x the upvotes than my actual post :(

you've gone from celebrating a mom to lecturing a stranger about their supposed self-pity. maybe ease up on diagnosing people from reddit comments. you made up a whole fucking backstory about me because i disagreed with you. but sure, i'm too sensitive.

bro 😂💯

people are fucking retarded.

Comment has been removed

answers to op’s questions

does active dry yeast require a different proportion from instant yeast?

sometimes, depending on the manufacturer. modern active dry and instant yeast are commonly exchanged one for one. fleischmann’s recommends 25 percent more active dry when replacing rapidrise. in this particular recipe, though, the original 15 g yeast amount looks much more like fresh yeast, making approximately 6 g active dry the sensible conversion.

can too much yeast cause rapid rising and overproofing?

absolutely. it does not guarantee failure, because you can compensate by baking sooner, but it dramatically shortens the available window. using 18.75 g active dry yeast with 500 g flour would make the dough extremely difficult for a beginner to time.

the first proof may already have gone too far before op returned after an hour. shaping temporarily knocked out the gas, making the dough appear normal again, but it then raced through the second proof.

how do you prevent overproofing?

• use a sensible amount of yeast
• mark the starting height on the first-rise container
• judge the dough rather than the timer
• begin checking at approximately half the suggested time
• check every 10 to 15 minutes after that
• use cooler water or a cooler room if the dough is moving too quickly
• preheat the oven before the dough reaches its final target
• flip these particular rolls before they become completely inflated and fragile

a gentle indentation that slowly returns partway is generally ready. immediate springing means it needs longer. no movement combined with very fragile dough means it is at its limit or already overproofed.

what should cover the dough?

lightly greased plastic wrap is fine. the important parts are preventing direct dry contact and leaving enough room for expansion. an inverted deep tray is even better because nothing touches the dough.

cling wrap was not inherently the problem. the rolls expanded into it, were probably overproofed and had not been protected by oil.

how does previously manageable dough become a wet, sticky monster?

the water did not suddenly appear. the dough lost its ability to contain the water it already had.

excessive fermentation stretches and weakens the gluten network. the dough loses surface tension, spreads, becomes fragile and behaves much wetter. condensation under the covering and direct contact with ungreased surfaces make the sticking even worse.

the butter contributed only around 3 g additional water, so it was not the real cause.

what is the best home-oven steam method?

use a preheated heavy metal pan or cast-iron skillet on the lower rack. load the bread, carefully pour approximately one cup of boiling water into that pan, and close the oven immediately. king arthur recommends boiling water in a preheated heavy pan because it produces stronger, more sustained steam than a small amount of cold water. their steam guide explains the method.

do not use glass, do not pour water directly onto the oven floor and keep your face and hands away from the steam.

a brief visible cloud does not mean the steam disappeared. hot water vapour inside the oven is largely invisible, and home ovens also vent continuously.

the salt issue

10 g salt with 500 g flour is exactly 2 percent, which is a standard bread formula. it should not ordinarily be overwhelmingly salty.

possible explanations include:

• the scale was inaccurate at low weights
• the salt was accidentally measured or added twice
• sugar and salt were confused
• the salt was not mixed evenly after being added last
• op simply prefers less salt
• the massive amount of yeast created a harsh flavour that made the finished bread even less pleasant

salted butter would add only a tiny amount and would not explain a dramatic difference. after verifying the scale, reducing the salt to 8 g would be reasonable if 10 g still tastes too salty.

so, no, i cannot honestly say the isolated 25 percent ai answer was perfectly suited to this recipe. it came from a real manufacturer conversion, but the better answer required reading the entire formula and noticing that the original 15 g yeast measurement was probably fresh yeast or an error. with the complete recipe in front of me, that is the point where i would have tried to prevent the failure.

You know, just for shits and giggles, I thought to myself a couple things. One, OP didn't use AI except for anything regarding the yeast stuff. They actually did use a recipe from a human. So like, you're telling me to go get human recipes, yet OP did that and it didn't work out in their favor. Secondly, I decided I would run the exact same situation through my AI and ask it what it would say to me. And I gave it the recipe, and this is what it had to say, and it pointed out things not one 'experienced baker' here caught:

okay, having now read the exact recipe, my honest answer is that i would have stopped you at the yeast measurement before you ever mixed the dough. that is the biggest red flag here.

what the recipe actually contains

the written recipe uses:

• 500 g bread flour
• 300 g water
• 17.5 g lard
• 15 g sugar
• 10 g salt
• 15 g unspecified yeast

it calls that yeast amount 3 percent of the flour. it also currently says the shaped rolls should nearly triple, taking approximately two hours. that already conflicts with the 60 to 90 minutes op heard in the video. that is what the written recipe currently says.

the yeast problem

15 g is an unusually large amount of dry yeast for only 500 g flour. however, 3 percent is a completely normal amount for fresh compressed yeast.

king arthur says fresh yeast should be multiplied by approximately 0.33 for instant yeast or 0.4 for active dry yeast. that converts 15 g fresh yeast into approximately:

• 5 g instant yeast
• 6 g active dry yeast

a different detailed dominican pan de agua recipe uses exactly 5 g instant yeast with 500 g flour, along with nearly identical amounts of water, sugar, salt and fat. that strongly suggests the 15 g measurement in the linked recipe may have been intended for fresh yeast, or the yeast type was omitted.

if op interpreted that as 15 g instant yeast and then increased it by 25 percent, they used 18.75 g active dry yeast. that is an enormous amount for 500 g flour. it would make both proofs move extremely quickly and leave almost no margin for error.

fleischmann’s really does recommend 25 percent more active dry when replacing its rapidrise instant yeast. however, king arthur and red star generally recommend modern active dry and instant yeast one for one, with active dry taking slightly longer. so the ai answer was based on legitimate published guidance, but it lacked the recipe-specific warning that the original 15 g measurement was already suspicious.

if you had shown me this exact recipe and said you only had active dry yeast, i would have told you:

• do not use 18.75 g
• use approximately 6 g active dry yeast
• activate it in about 50 g of the recipe’s water with a little of the existing sugar
• keep the remaining 250 g water cool, so the final dough does not become excessively warm

replacing the lard with butter

i would have told you that 17.5 g unsalted butter is a safe direct substitution.

butter contains around 15 to 18 percent water, whereas lard is almost entirely fat. using 17.5 g butter therefore adds only approximately 3 g extra water. that changes the hydration from 60 percent to roughly 60.6 percent, which is nowhere near enough to turn this dough into oobleck.

the butter might make the bread slightly softer, give it a different flavour and change the browning, but it would not explain this failure. i would use softened rather than melted butter and incorporate it in two stages, as the recipe directs.

what i would have recommended before proofing

with the yeast corrected, my working formula would have been:

• 500 g bread flour
• 300 g total water
• 17.5 g unsalted butter
• 15 g sugar
• 10 g salt
• 6 g active dry yeast

for the first proof, i would say to ignore the promised one-hour time and stop when the dough had genuinely doubled. i would begin checking around 30 minutes.

for the second proof, i would not let fully inflated, delicate rolls sit directly against dry plastic wrap. i would use one of these:

• lightly greased plastic wrap with plenty of slack
• an inverted deep baking tray that cannot touch the rolls
• a clean damp towel positioned so it cannot settle onto the dough

i would also grease the parchment and leave plenty of space between the rolls.

most importantly, i would flip them before they reached their maximum proof, then let them finish proofing right-side up. the comparable dominican recipe proofs them upside down for approximately 45 minutes, flips them, and then gives them another approximately 45 minutes. trying to flip completely proofed rolls at the very last second makes damage much more likely.

what i would have said once they became sticky and overproofed

if you told me they no longer sprang back, had become extremely sticky and were tearing, i would say:

1. stop proofing immediately and preheat the oven.
2. do not keep trying to preserve the traditional shape. if they are already fragile, the flip is no longer worth it.
3. place the tray in the refrigerator for approximately 10 minutes while the oven heats. this will not reverse overproofing, but it may firm the dough enough to remove the plastic more cleanly.
4. use an oiled bench scraper to release the dough. if it is already attached to oven-safe parchment, leave it attached rather than tearing it away.
5. if the rolls remain mostly intact, bake them immediately.
6. if they have completely collapsed and torn apart, gently gather and reshape them, then give them only a very short final proof before baking.
7. if the gluten has become so damaged that reshaping is impossible, scrape everything into a well-oiled pan, spread it out and bake it as a rough focaccia or flatbread. it would not be proper pan de agua, but it would probably still be edible.

steam cannot restore a destroyed gluten structure. it keeps the surface flexible during the beginning of baking, allowing existing gas and oven spring to expand the bread. it does not create new structure or replace gas that has already escaped.

just wait bro

also dont use roids or else in 2 years you'll be posting "how can i not look so old?"

its only a matter of time until she see me as a romantic option

he is right. once chad has gotten her pregnant and shes a single mom, shes all his.

stuck up rich bitch

a crappy AI image would be better

his aim wasn't the thing saving him that day

i always thought Lucy was so dumb... like she just gets overloaded with some drugs and somehow gains God powers.... like the writers couldnt come up with anything better than that?