I admit, I held off from covering this peculiar electric motorcycle for fear that people might not take me seriously in the wake of April Fools' Day. But this wind/solar motorcycle is as real as it can get, and is even available for purchase!
TBF, there is a big difference between “advertising a product as a joke with no intention of production” vs “we intend to produce this but we haven’t tested it fully yet”/“we don’t want you to see the numbers, just buy it”
The author is still accurate. The product isn’t a joke. It may not be a smart idea, and it may not work, but it isn’t a joke. They even provided a link to the site where you could purchase it from China at the end of the article.
I’m thinking in the same sense that the author is. They actually meant a literal joke, as in April Fools, because they said as much in the first paragraph.
The original comment comes off like you’re accusing them of being contradictory with themselves, but they’re not.
TBF, there is a big difference between “advertising a product as a joke with no intention of production” vs “we intend to produce this but we haven’t tested it fully yet”/“we don’t want you to see the numbers, just buy it”
The author is still accurate. The product isn’t a joke. It may not be a smart idea, and it may not work, but it isn’t a joke. They even provided a link to the site where you could purchase it from China at the end of the article.
If it doesn’t work it’s still a joke, just not in the sense you’re thinking.
I’m thinking in the same sense that the author is. They actually meant a literal joke, as in April Fools, because they said as much in the first paragraph.
The original comment comes off like you’re accusing them of being contradictory with themselves, but they’re not.
I am saying the author is contradicting themselves, but I wasn’t trying to draw attention to the dual meaning of the word “joke.”
That “thing” is not legit, as the headline claims. It’s a joke, I’m just not sure if the author or designer are in on it.