Hey, though, you’re the first person in this thread to actually mention by name a vegan Nutella alternative that doesn’t use palm oil, so you win first prize. 🏆🥳

the V-word is just off-putting to quite a few omnivores.

The discussion was about the ingredients being too exotic, not the labeling, but regarding the labeling, I don’t understand how a vegan product marketed toward vegans by indicating it’s vegan is a bad decision. Nocciolata puts up the label “vegan” too (it’s also palm oil-free, which is cool). Again, I’m sure Ferrero understands what their target audience is for this and have accounted for the extremely-close-minded-omni demographic.

This entire comment confuses me.

Here in Germany, chickpea is relatively exotic

I can’t speak to Germany, but at least where I am, chickpeas really aren’t exotic, even to people who really don’t know much of anything about other cultures. (Also, this won’t be in the German market yet; closest is the Belgian one.)

I’ve never seen rice syrup as an ingredient in anything that wasn’t specifically made for vegans.

I’ve never heard of this stereotype of rice syrup being especially prevalent in vegan products. I see rice syrup as a bit exotic, but not in a way that anyone who isn’t vegan but would be willing to buy vegan Nutella would think “well that’s just too out there for me. Syrup? Gross.”

It feels like they created a product specifically for the vegan market

That does seem to be the point of them removing dairy, yes.

which means they’re alienating parts of the non-vegan market

?_? How would this be alienating to someone who’s not vegan would otherwise try it as a vegan alternative? Like say what you want about enormous corporations like Ferrero, but I’m at least reasonably confident they did some market testing for this. The problem this comment is addressing feels extremely manufactured. If it doesn’t appeal to you, that’s one thing, but it feels like you’re overgeneralizing your own niche experience onto everyone else.

Wait, was there ever any doubt that Nutella is diabetes and CVD in a jar?

Edit: Apparently Ferrero marketed it as healthy if a comment below is to be believed. What the fuuuuuuck.

As someone out-of-the-loop here, do tell. I was hoping they might be out there, and I might give them a shot if they’re vegan.

Edit: found one thanks to JubilantJaguar below.

It’s sweet but not overly sweet and very rich. It’s like if you took fudge, made it creamier, and spread it on something. It’s been quite a few years since I’ve had it. Because it’s one of those foods that, like bacon, everyone seems to treat as literal perfection as almost a meme, I’m sure it has an air of intrigue to it. Like bacon, I feel, it’s pretty good but unexceptional.

Can confirm that /c/vegan officially endorses the Trump/Vance ticket.

plus dried cranberries

Excuse me? You can’t just open up my world to the flavor combination of “nutty and tart” without giving me time to prepare.

(That sounds amazing)

In fact, if you read this post backwards, you’ll see a recipe for a really ripping lentil soup.

It should hopefully get better from here, and this should hopefully be the last drama post. Vegan news and recipes will be back very shortly, but it’s understandable if you don’t trust that after this.

Hi, what’s likely Beaver’s alt. Can you please not drag naeva into this unless they request to be dragged into it? If they want to rejoin the moderation team on their own terms, they’re more than welcome, and I’d love to have them back here.

I’m treating it as a threat.

Respectfully, JF, I believe it’s a perfectly compassionate approach to gently ask someone to pump the brakes on their behavior and, when they escalate even further, to attempt to cool things off by forcibly deescalating. I personally am diagnosed bipolar and have many friends who are as well; this isn’t a diagnosis, and the word is often used colloquially.

I think it’s entirely valid not to assume good faith given the circumstances. What’s at stake here is that Beaver was destroying the community in real time through a nonsensical interpretation of Rule 5, and I think it’s perfectly valid to point out that you were instated by Beaver right as she started this posting spree that landed us in this mess in the first place. Thelemmybud was put in place at the same time (they’ve never posted here, rarely post at all, and have the same specific niche interests as Beaver, leading me to believe it was a LW alt for the fact that federated moderation is jank), and strangely, long-time moderator Eevoltic was removed, although I’m not sure if that was of their own doing since I cannot view who performed that action.

I’m going to work toward building this community up instead of burning it to the ground; I’m sorry that’s disagreeable to you. (Also wait, when did I swear? “Shitposting”?)

She didn’t just not process the reply; she actively replied but to something else, showing that she was deliberately ignoring the other portion. You were instated as a moderator two days ago by Beaver – essentially around the same time as she went on her spree, so it’s unsurprising that you support it. She also ostensibly instated an alt in the form of Thelemmybud, but I can’t say for certain that it’s an alt.

Beaver has been destroying this community, and it’s going to take months to restore any goodwill we had over just two days of manic, petulant shitposting. I’m not reinstating her, because this community is going to die if she’s allowed to continue to abuse her power.

It’s always been my understanding that oysters are bivalves.

When people ask me why we put so much money into space research, I’ll point out that cosmologists might find a way to treat Laura Loomer’s bipolar if they ever find where all the missing lithium went.

HappyCow can be a good resource for this sort of thing. Every time it gets mentioned, though, an old Smosh skit gets stuck in my head.

Regarding your last paragraph, I broadly agree. I’ve said before that I could see this becoming a weird wedge issue in the far future where humans have finally reached a broad consensus against exploiting mammals, birds, fish, etc. for food but where maybe now the main ethical cause is against the exploitation of insects. And within those who oppose insect exploitation, you hypothetically have a split over whether the line is at animals or whether it’s at having a CNS.

For right now, I think it’s very low on the list of priorities because “Does a cheeseburger justify perpetuating unimaginable suffering on an unfathomable scale? Discuss, and if you say ‘no’, then you’re an extremist weirdo.” is where the Overton window is at right now. Nonetheless, going around telling a major newspaper to write a human interest story on you advocating the position that eating animals is vegan unambiguously deserves pushback.

Yes, but you’d have to be really strict about the word “consenting”. Human breast milk is vegan as long as it’s given freely with consent and not as a form of exploitation, and so we could probably engineer a convoluted scenario where human meat is technically vegan. Let’s run through some possible ones with the understanding that all of it is still nasty as fuck, unethical in every circumstance that could plausibly happen in the real world, and will probably give you a prion disease:

• Killing and eating someone without their consent. Obviously unethical and obviously not vegan; moving on.
• Finding and eating an already-dead body. Desecrating a corpse is – I think – widely considered a very cruel act toward a person even if they’re no longer alive, and moreover, it would inflict immense psychological suffering on those close to that person that their family member or friend was dismembered to be eaten.
• Getting consent to eat them after they die. I think this is probably the closest you could physically get to giving Carl from Llamas with Hats a vegan diet. First, the person would need to offer consent, and I think this would go beyond traditional contract law, requiring robust, multifaceted mediation from psychiatric professionals as well as a judge. “Are you sure you want to do this, and are you sure you’re in the right state of mind to consent to something like this?” Next, both death and how they’re eaten would have to be strictly on the terms of the one being eaten: their time, their method, their circumstance. If they want to back out at the last minute, that’s their prerogative. And lastly, for such an extreme circumstance, I think it should be the case that you can’t promise anything at all in exchange, and it must not be from any person who has tangible power over the lives of the person being eaten or someone very close to the person being eaten. Essentially trying to limit the possibility of a quid pro quo. Even with this broad list of protections, there are almost assuredly factors I’m not properly accounting for.

TL;DR: Not in the real world, no.