On 6/22/2015 10:32 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 21:30:43 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>> On 6/22/2015 7:49 PM, Sqwertz wrote:
>>
>>> OK, so I looked at he picture. It's not unreasonable to assume that
>>> it may be a rat - it sure looks like a deep fried rat to me. KFC is
>>> being carelessly indignant. KFC should be apologizing and kissing
>>> this guy's ass for not having enough quality control to serve
>>> something that looks like a rat. Are their lawyers nuts?
>>
>> He says he knows what he bit into. If it looked like a rat and he
>> thought it was a rat, why did he bit it?
>
> Yeah, I didn't quite understand that comment. That needed more
> context. Rat is white meat, right? If he knew it was chicken, why
> would he get a lawyer?
>
>> Oh wait, I know, he wanted to get a bundle of money. KFC should sue his
>> ass broke.
>
> I didn't see how he presented his gripe on social media. That would
> determine... OK, here it is:
>
> "I went to KFC and [bought] a 3 [piece] chicken tender! As I bit into
> a piece of it noticed it was very hard/touch and rubbery! Which sent
> this deep chill throughout my body. I looked down at it and saw it was
> a cooked rat! Made me feel sick!"
>
> A little dramatic, but I'd hardly call that a lawsuit from KFC. I
> still think KFC is more at fault here. Don't serve chicken that looks
> like rats and you won't have people questioning the content of your
> product. And you can't blame viral social media for making a mountain
> out of a mole! (or a rat ;-)
>
> -sw
>

And thereby hangs a tail...