@doppelgreener Ya, it was a bit of a strange interaction but it makes sense to me now. Seems like the question was pretty popular too, ended up seeing it on HNQ. Thanks for the answer

Fun, just got an answer deleted on skeptics because I didn't provide sources that making straws and cups requires more machinery and resources then making cups

@JoeW I just found that question. The claim is that the new cups use more plastic than the old cups and straws put together

yah

That claim necessarily implies that the new cups are different than the old ones, so pointing out that any particular cup+straw combo uses more plastic than just that same cup doesn't refute the claim

Oh, it's lids, not cups, but it's the same point

my answer wasn't trying to refute the claim as much as point out that there is more to a lid+straw or lid then the material in the final poduct

I didn't notice one of the rules on skeptics about answers before I posted and it wasn't obvious until the answer was deleted so I couldn't do anything about it

You can edit and get it undeleted, right?

yah but trying to find studies showing how much packaging goes into straws versus lids is going to be very difficult if not impossioble

and now would need a moderator to do it

and it seems overthere not editing an answer in 21 hours during the work week is refusing to update it

if you do find them then yeah it'd get undeleted, but skeptics has some heavy citation requirements

because what seems to make sense but has no verification is what they're busy dealing with verifying, and it cannot be verified with more things that seem to make sense but have no verification

it does place heavy citation requirements on answers though

but they can't do without

just was a little annoying to have a mod post saying I refused to update and not knowing the rule

and being at work I couldn't do anything anyway