This was posted 3 years 3 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[NSW] 15 Pieces of Pork Dumplings & Drink $6.50 at Dumpling Hut (Sydney CBD) @ Groupon

790
[NSW] 15 Pieces of Pork Dumplings & Drink $6.50 at Dumpling Hut (Sydney CBD) @ GrouponAffiliate
Go to Deal
Cashback
web50 on 17/04/2021 - 12:08 groupon.com.au (1797 clicks)
Last edited 19/04/2021 - 01:01 by 2 other users
This post contains affiliate links. OzBargain might earn commissions when you click through and make purchases. Please see this page for more information.

OZBargainer City Workers,

If you like dumplings for lunch, this looks to be a good deal. You get 15 pieces of pork dumplings plus a drink for $6.50 at Dumpling Hut CBD (near Town Hall).

Just note that the deal is valid for takeaway only, and it's good from Monday to Friday 11am-3.30pm. No booking is required, and the vouchers expire 30 days from purchase.

Don't forget cash back apps!

Dining & Takeaway Dumplings Instagrampost Lunch

Related Stores

Groupon Australia
Groupon Australia
Marketplace
Baba Wu's Asian
Baba Wu's Asian

closed Comments

  • StarPlatinum on 17/04/2021 - 12:14
    +4

    Its pretty yum I got it before worth the price

      • Chchnu on 17/04/2021 - 13:07

        Ok Karen

        • afoveht on 17/04/2021 - 13:23
          -3

          Karens > pig molesters.

          • 191919 on 17/04/2021 - 13:47

            @afoveht: please go talk about your opinion on meat somewhere else, i promise nobody cares about your (ill-informed) opinion on a bargain site

            • afoveht on 17/04/2021 - 14:07
              -1

              @191919: I'll informed? You telling me pigs don't have things stuck up their vaginas in modern pig "farming?" Tell me more!

              • 191919 on 17/04/2021 - 14:13

                @afoveht: dude if you've never artificially inseminated a pig you've never lived, quote me on that next time you're making a protest banner

                • afoveht on 17/04/2021 - 14:25

                  @191919: It's always just a matter of time till the nonvegans' arguments decend into absurdity. It's all you really have.

      • Mr Frodo on 17/04/2021 - 13:44

        Wtf is wrong with you man!

        • afoveht on 17/04/2021 - 13:55
          -5

          Who's the one paying to have things stuck up pigs' vaginas?

          Wtf is wrong with you man?

          • 191919 on 17/04/2021 - 14:08
            +1

            @afoveht: kinkshaming is so 2020

            • afoveht on 17/04/2021 - 14:09

              @191919: These pigs start getting inseminated in their pubescence. It's not even kinky, more pedo if you want to take that angle.

      • Baghern on 17/04/2021 - 14:07
        +1

        I love you man… people like you mean there is more meat for me for longer….

        Haha now I feel like the smokers who want to be able to smoke in the park for "fresh air"

      • Starcraftmazter on 17/04/2021 - 20:53
        -1

        ok boomer

      • morse on 18/04/2021 - 03:10
        +2

        Genuinely curious, not judging or criticising (I’m former vego for animal welfare reasons, but then went pesco then omnivore for a variety of reasons). Do you do much campaigning for improving standards for farmed pigs? Or just advocate for people not to eat them at all? It seems to me that it’s very unlikely in the near future that most people will stop eating pork and become vegos or vegans. So I wonder if efforts are best directed to improving minimum standards for animal welfare. In terms of artificial insemination I’ve read about it being used for gender selection for bovines to avoid the issue of bobby calves, which I actually think is great. Sure it’s not perfect, but as you’re campaigning on ozbargain presumably you’re trying to change the behaviour of others to improve the lives of animals, you’re very unlikely to convince most people to not eat pork (especially when throwing insults around) and I wonder if your efforts are best directed in ways you can actually make change. eg convincing people who might be considering veganism by being supportive/helpful and campaigning for laws/practices that help animals knowing that most people are going to keep eating animals products. Or is it just to voice your beliefs without expectation for improving animal welfare (which is perfectly valid too). Honestly just genuinely curious about your approach.

        • afoveht on 18/04/2021 - 11:54
          -1

          I've learnt long ago that I can't change anyone - people need to want to change themselves. So I'm not even trying to do that.

          How we view other animals, like many other ways we view the world, is not something that just changes with a single post. It is an entire mindset that is entrenched in (usually years of) conditioning. If anyone does in fact have a "wow moment" it is usually the precipitating factor in a barrage of new information and often a release from discomfort about their currently held views.

          What I sometimes say here is only one of many things that a nonvegan may hear. Now tell me honestly: is there any factual error in what I wrote, and could not anyone click on those links and determine that what I wrote is factually untrue? I don't think so. Yet so many negs. This is a reaction born of cognitive dissonance and its reactivity. People realise they pay to have things stuck up pigs' vaginas yet do not really think that sticking things up pigs' vaginas is something they are generally ok with. Some people neg, others like in the example above overcompensate with absurdities. True psychopaths would not even bother to vote or comment or otherwise react to such provocations. So IMO negs may actually be a healthy sign of some form of engagement. Cognitive dissonance shows that the person can actually feel.

          Is hard enough to challenge someone on their intellectual paradigms, let alone their ethical paradigms. The former challenges their intelligence, the latter their morality. No-one wants to think of themselves as being stupid or immoral - look up the sunk cost / escalation of commitment fallacies. Consider the general snarkiness on this site for small things; it is not unreasonable to expect massive backlash when putting forward challenging ethical ideas. It is not unreasonable for this backlash to descend into absurdity when there is no other good justification. This is why most responses to vegan challenges end with "but bacon" and "now I'm going to eat two burgers" and "you haven't lived to you've inseminated a pig" and similar nonsense.

          So if all substantial beliefs / positions are elaborate frameworks built over time how to challenge them? My own understanding is that there are various times where different tactics may be used to project information and chop at the structures holding up an existing framework. There is dismantling and reconstruction. No single one will work. Will some work better? Probably, and this is dependant on all sorts of factors, many of which are outside of my control in this particular space. I have just as many (more actually) "pleasant" conversations with people about veganism, but that will not work here. It's the same reason why a protester will hold a firm placard while shouting out slogans on a march but then also be able to sit down with someone in a different space and have a conversation. You can see that right here, right now - you have demonstrated engagement, and I am conversing with you. What is certain though is that more interaction without ultimately alienating the other party away is always better - it's like a continual grinding, stopping just enough so the job doesn't get too hot.

          So my little ruffling of feathers here is pretty much just one of many strikes against an existing paradigm. Does it mean much on its own? No. Will it change anyone? No. Is it just one more tiny thing that will ultimately make a slight difference in someone's moving from being pro animal exploitation to being anti animal exploitation? I'd like to think so.

          Do you do much campaigning for improving standards for farmed pigs? Or just advocate for people not to eat them at all?

          Google MLK Jr on "The White Moderate." It's a short read. There is no way to campaign to regulate an injustice. You say you were vego? You were then still of the opinion that animals exist primarily to be our resources, not for their own purposes, just that you had slightly different terms than more indiscriminate eaters. Vegetarians are to animal rights what the White Moderates are to racism, what Tesla drivers are to conservation of the natural environment, what "Bashing my wife once per week is better than bashing her every day" is to being against domestic violence. These positions cloud the issue and are ultimately deleterious for the purposes they pretend to support.

          There has never before been a time with more laws about regulating animal exploitation, yet there has never been a time before where more animals are exploited and in the worst possible ways. Regulating animal exploitation is just a circle jerk for animal exploiters. Abusers are never in a right position to determine how much their victims can handle.

          • morse on 19/04/2021 - 06:25
            +1

            @afoveht: Thanks for explaining your thinking. It’s interesting to hear different perspectives.

            People realise they pay to have things stuck up pigs' vaginas yet do not really think that sticking things up pigs' vaginas is something they are generally ok with.

            Yeah for some reason this doesn’t bother me all that much assuming you’re talking about insemination. There’s definitely things that happen to pigs and other animals that bother me more.

            No-one wants to think of themselves as being stupid or immoral

            Actually I’m fairly comfortable with both. I know for a fact that the way I live is not completely ethical, I have extra money that I don’t give away to people in need even though I could, I eat meat, I use disposable nappies on my kid, I sometimes say unkind things about people who’ve annoyed/upset me and I definitely use more than my fair share of electricity and natural resources (like most Aussies do). Maybe this is what Christians talk about with original sin (not being one I can’t be sure). I know I’ll never be morally perfect; yes that doesn’t make the less bad things good but some realists would say murdering someone in a fit of rage is worse than calling them a C, neither being good. I honestly would go insane trying to be morally perfect.

            You say you were vego? You were then still of the opinion that animals exist primarily to be our resources, not for their own purposes

            I’d say animals exist. Sometimes they have a purpose for humans, but they don’t exist because of that purpose they just happen to be used by humans in that way, unfortunately for them. Your argument could be likened to saying that if you use any kind product that has involved slave labour, that you think those people exist for your purpose. It’s very likely that you do utilise slave labour given you’re using electronics to access the internet.

            "Bashing my wife once per week is better than bashing her every day"

            This is a little different, frequency of one poor act vs different kind of acts. ie an equivalent would be eating pork daily is worse than eating it once a week, where being vego might be eating a free range but still farmed egg and not eating pork. The vego might be morally comfortable with eating the egg even if you aren’t. It doesn’t make eating and egg the same as eating pork.

            You can see that right here, right now - you have demonstrated engagement, and I am conversing with you. What is certain though is that more interaction without ultimately alienating the other party away is always better

            Not all engagement is good for your cause. The Westboro Baptist church certainly got some strong engagement, but mostly it worked against their cause. I would say much of what you say does alienate and turn people away from your cause, hence the reactions you get, which on a population level may actually result in more harm to animals than if you’d said nothing and just keep doing your own veganism or talk to those interested.

            Anyhow full support to your veganism and care for animals. It’s not for me - but that’s a story for another day and I’m sure one you’ve heard many iterations of from lots of people.

            • afoveht on 19/04/2021 - 10:44

              @morse: So you don't have a problem with things being stuck up pigs' vaginas if it's for insemination. See, that's just an example of the abuser getting to decide what is right for the victim. You think the pig cares if it's for insemination or any other reason?

              All these things happen to child pigs in modern farming, all without any painkillers:
              - teeth extracted
              - tails docked
              - ears notched
              - males' testicles removed
              - lightweight / underperforming pigs slammed against the floor to their death

              Which of those do you approve of?

              Sows are kept in cages their entire adult life and cannot even turn around. They never see the sun, never breathe fresh air, never get to spend a moment in freedom with their children. They sh1t in the same space they sleep, just that they are on a hard metal grate so that their crap can be washed away. Do you approve of that?

              The animals are defaced, sprayed with paint as identification. In light of the other horrors they face this might seem trivial but this is indicative of the utter commodification and disrespect we show these animals. They are merely units of production. The idea that we "love" or care for them is a fantasy and an outright lie. Do you approve of that?

              Why would you think your approval is a good meter of what other sentient beings deserve?

              • morse on 19/04/2021 - 11:37
                +1

                @afoveht: Like I said I think the most practical focus is to improve welfare of farmed animals and where possible avoid harm including the types of abuse you mention, knowing full well the entire human population is unlikely become permanently either vegetarian or vegan. Even if animal farming and hunting became illegal (which is highly likely) it would still go on. Doing this doesn’t stop anyone becoming vegan.

                If you go back over our dialogue and your dialogue with others, perhaps reflect on how your communication might actually put people off veganism. Your cause, your call.

                • afoveht on 19/04/2021 - 12:30

                  @morse: You pay for all those things. How do you expect to "improve welfare and remove harm" when you are paying for it and supporting it?

                  Nonvegans always seem to be experts on how vegans could be better advocates. So tell me, what would you have me tell you for you to actually care? You want me to say I'm ok with you telling me you're ok with torturing animals but then somehow try and tell you you should change?

                  If this conversation was about dogs rather than pigs most people would be hi-fiving me. This incongruity is called speciesism, and just another form of prejudicial discrimination.

                  • morse on 19/04/2021 - 13:58

                    @afoveht: I suppose it depends what your ultimate goal is. You seem quite absolute that everyone being vegan is the only objective, so if that’s the case there’s very little you can say. It’s highly unlikely that I’ll become a vegan. I could quite easily swing back to pesce or veggie and have discussed it with my husband a number of times. We have also been through no pork phases due to how pigs can be treated and bacon/ham being unhealthy, but have lapsed, as one of our baby’s few foods when we were struggling to get him to eat for a while was pork slices. If your goal was to reduce harm to animals you could also say positive things about strategies to improve welfare on farms , people reducing meat intake etc as well as advocating for veganism as your recommendation as the most ethical option. And you’re right it is speciesism, I would definitely eat a fish over a dog. I do feel for the pigs as I know they are smart and suffer, hence not keen on pork, but doesn’t want me want to become a vegan nor will your absolutist campaigning likely convince most.

                    • afoveht on 19/04/2021 - 14:24

                      @morse:

                      I do feel for the pigs

                      Yet you show no support for them here, rather you challenge the only person in this post that has challenged exploiting them, and you continue to exploit them yourself. You treat pigs like things, not as sentient beings.

                      There is no convincing you - that's something you might do yourself in due course, but clearly not today. Check out the videos I linked to - if they don't convince you then you are comfortable enough in your own confusion or hypocrisy - you are not ready to be convinced. Your easiest course of action is to tell me how I'm doing it wrong and how I'm an ar5ehole (and you may be right, but it doesn't change the argument) and continue making excuses to exploit pigs.

                      • morse on 19/04/2021 - 15:09

                        @afoveht: I literally didn’t call you any kind of hole. Nor have I challenged your veganism, I genuinely think it’s a good thing for you (presuming you get your B12 through supplements, a vegan colleague permanently lost sensation in their lower limbs from this) and the animals, and have said so throughout the thread. I questioned your approach and some of your logic, particularly the absolutism and black and white thinking. I think veganism is great, but I also think it’s unrealistic that the whole planet will join you, don’t think it’s for me and can see other ways of improving animal welfare alongside those who choose veganism.

                        • afoveht on 19/04/2021 - 15:19

                          @morse: How are you going to improve pig welfare? By talking about how you're going to improve it while you actually fund atrocities? You sound like Tony Abbott on women or Donald Trump on workers.

  • Alphaduck99 on 17/04/2021 - 12:36
    +7

    Another 10% off today with Groupon code NOTIME + 5% cashrewards makes it about $5.70. Nom nom nom

    • random12 on 17/04/2021 - 23:14

      Cashrewards says 5% for groupon, but it also mentions 'show with NOTIME - up to 30% off' . Is it only 10% for food?

      So Groupon gives you 10% off, and then cashrewards gives 5% cashback on what you spend?

  • jamessong on 17/04/2021 - 13:27

    What sort of drink?

    • StarPlatinum on 17/04/2021 - 13:36

      When I went I got water and my mate got coke.

    • Jollystacker on 17/04/2021 - 14:00
      +1

      Coles water or can of soft drink

  • froodh on 17/04/2021 - 13:56
    +1

    need this in Adelaide

  • Answer1 on 17/04/2021 - 18:16

    Wow this is awesome

  • canberrascooter on 17/04/2021 - 21:16

    "vouchers expire 30 days from purchase"

    what does this even mean. voucher expire after purchase?

    • andyman1908 on 17/04/2021 - 22:09

      Pretty self explantory. You buy Groupon voucher, you need to use within 30 days.

      • canberrascooter on 17/04/2021 - 22:12

        Purchase of the voucher? I thought voucher are usually free. Sorry I never used Groupon before, so I don't know how it actually works

        • random12 on 17/04/2021 - 23:19

          You prepay, and the discount is built into the voucher.

          The normal price is $11, but you buy the voucher online for $6.50, and then present it in store.

    • ilikedeals on 17/04/2021 - 22:10

      30 days starting from the purchase date

  • jamessong on 21/04/2021 - 06:34

    Shouldn't this come with pork bun/s?

    • andyman1908 on 21/04/2021 - 10:01

      Got the deal yesterday, yes one pork bun. Only ate about 13 of the 15 dumplings and chucked out the rest and pork bun. Was large serving size!
      6.5/10 I'd give it.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join