| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:13:44 -0600, Damsel
> wrote: > Know what would be fun? Pick someone (who has a list with them) at random > when you walk into the store and follow them around. Buy everything that > they buy and get in line behind them. You get the benefit of a well > thought-out list, and you've gotten to make someone paranoid, all in one > fell swoop. You have a very twisted mind... maybe you can sell that idea to Letterman! sf |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:24:03 -0500, Dave Smith >
wrote: >Siobhan Perricone wrote: > >> >>You should have tried shopping with my late brother in law. A >> >>mere list was not good enough for him. He had maps of the layout >> >>of the grocery stores in his town. The list was written in the >> >>order of location. >> > >> >*blush* When Cub Foods used to offer a layout of their store, I did the >> >same thing. >> >> Nothin' to blush about Damsel.  Don't be embarassed just 'cos someone>> else seems to think there's something wrong with doing things this way. > >The problem wasn't with him doing it. It was the need to have the maps that was >the problem. It was a personality quirk that included detailed maps and lists >of everything. A set of directions to a place he had one been would include >exact distances of every landmark along the way. He had a substantial >collection of movies that he had taped from his TV and a catalogue of the >tapes, listed alphabetically by title, by director and by actor. There are >benefits to good organizational skills, and I could certainly stand to be more >organized than I am, but sometimes it is more of a disease. Yeah, it is. It's called Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). I have it, too, but since I found out, I'm fighting it every step of the way. My herbs and spices are no longer alphabetized. They're on turntables (Of course, there's one turntable for herbs and one for spices. Heaven help the house guest who wants to prepare a meal and doesn't know the difference). <G> I no longer hang my clothes according to type (blouses, skirts, pants, blazers) and then again by color (in rainbow order - reds, oranges, yellows, greens, etc.) within each type. By type is a good idea. By color is overboard for me now, but I sure understand if someone else needs things to be that way. The list goes on and on. I feel for your late brother in law and those like him. It's terrible to be held captive by some of these things. Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:24:03 -0500, Dave Smith >
wrote: >Siobhan Perricone wrote: > >> >>You should have tried shopping with my late brother in law. A >> >>mere list was not good enough for him. He had maps of the layout >> >>of the grocery stores in his town. The list was written in the >> >>order of location. >> > >> >*blush* When Cub Foods used to offer a layout of their store, I did the >> >same thing. >> >> Nothin' to blush about Damsel. Don't be embarassed just 'cos someone>> else seems to think there's something wrong with doing things this way. > >The problem wasn't with him doing it. It was the need to have the maps that was >the problem. It was a personality quirk that included detailed maps and lists >of everything. A set of directions to a place he had one been would include >exact distances of every landmark along the way. He had a substantial >collection of movies that he had taped from his TV and a catalogue of the >tapes, listed alphabetically by title, by director and by actor. There are >benefits to good organizational skills, and I could certainly stand to be more >organized than I am, but sometimes it is more of a disease. Yeah, it is. It's called Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). I have it, too, but since I found out, I'm fighting it every step of the way. My herbs and spices are no longer alphabetized. They're on turntables (Of course, there's one turntable for herbs and one for spices. Heaven help the house guest who wants to prepare a meal and doesn't know the difference). <G> I no longer hang my clothes according to type (blouses, skirts, pants, blazers) and then again by color (in rainbow order - reds, oranges, yellows, greens, etc.) within each type. By type is a good idea. By color is overboard for me now, but I sure understand if someone else needs things to be that way. The list goes on and on. I feel for your late brother in law and those like him. It's terrible to be held captive by some of these things. Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 10:24:03 -0500, Dave Smith >
wrote: >Siobhan Perricone wrote: > >> >>You should have tried shopping with my late brother in law. A >> >>mere list was not good enough for him. He had maps of the layout >> >>of the grocery stores in his town. The list was written in the >> >>order of location. >> > >> >*blush* When Cub Foods used to offer a layout of their store, I did the >> >same thing. >> >> Nothin' to blush about Damsel. Don't be embarassed just 'cos someone>> else seems to think there's something wrong with doing things this way. > >The problem wasn't with him doing it. It was the need to have the maps that was >the problem. It was a personality quirk that included detailed maps and lists >of everything. A set of directions to a place he had one been would include >exact distances of every landmark along the way. He had a substantial >collection of movies that he had taped from his TV and a catalogue of the >tapes, listed alphabetically by title, by director and by actor. There are >benefits to good organizational skills, and I could certainly stand to be more >organized than I am, but sometimes it is more of a disease. Yeah, it is. It's called Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). I have it, too, but since I found out, I'm fighting it every step of the way. My herbs and spices are no longer alphabetized. They're on turntables (Of course, there's one turntable for herbs and one for spices. Heaven help the house guest who wants to prepare a meal and doesn't know the difference). <G> I no longer hang my clothes according to type (blouses, skirts, pants, blazers) and then again by color (in rainbow order - reds, oranges, yellows, greens, etc.) within each type. By type is a good idea. By color is overboard for me now, but I sure understand if someone else needs things to be that way. The list goes on and on. I feel for your late brother in law and those like him. It's terrible to be held captive by some of these things. Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:03:27 -0500, Buttercup >
wrote: > >> says... >> >>>I've never seen spots like that. Real gimpspots or regular parking, > ^^^^^^^^^ >Excuse me? Thanks for saying what I wanted to. You did it in a much nicer way than I could have. Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:00:09 -0600, "jmcquown" >
wrote: >I must be really strange... Yes you are! Which is why we love you.  >(1) I snipped all the dang cross posting, like celebrities. You did WHAT? >(2) I count the items in my cart and if they don't fit the >Express Lane sign, I just look for a queue with someone who doesn't have 150 >items in it and stand in line. It's really a no-brainer and considerate, >too. I also have my check filled out (except for the amount) when I get up >there, or use my debit card. I'm usually right with you there. Although sometimes I go into Shopper's Daze, in which case, when it's time to pay, I accuse the cashier of being too picky because they want me to pay for my stuff. This is done with an apologetic smile. Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:28:49 -0800, sf > wrote:
>On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:13:44 -0600, Damsel > wrote: > >> Know what would be fun? Pick someone (who has a list with them) at random >> when you walk into the store and follow them around. Buy everything that >> they buy and get in line behind them. You get the benefit of a well >> thought-out list, and you've gotten to make someone paranoid, all in one >> fell swoop. > >You have a very twisted mind... Why, thankee! >maybe you can sell that idea to Letterman! There ya go! LOL! Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Siobhan Perricone" > wrote in message ... > On Sun, 16 Jan 2005 02:19:52 GMT, Mike > wrote: > Why do you treat the center lane like it's only a passing lane? You're > quite mistaken. The center lane is a driving lane, for people who are not > entering or exiting but driving through. The right lane is for people who > are entering and exiting the highway, and the left lane is the passing > lane. If you want to speed past people, then stay in the left lane. You'd be mistaken in NJ. Everyone is supposed to keep right except to pass. Obviously that is a joke. Once the troopers pulled over a guy for DWB (driving while black) in the drug running corridor that is the turnpike ... for driving in the center lane. Well, be more obvious for profiling, why don't you. I can't imagine how the heck you'd be able to get onto the highway if everyone drove in the right lane. nancy |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Tony P. wrote:
> Yes but the banks here make it disadvantageous to just enter the PIN and > go. The rule states that if you enter the pin, you're on the hook for > anywhere between .35 and .75 as a 'POS' fee that goes right to the bank. > But if you sign for it there isn't any additional charge. Funny how that > works. Where do you live? I've never been charged a fee like that. > Your signature doesn't mean diddly squat on credit card receipts. Last I > new banks didn't keep scores of handwriting analysts in their employ. http://www.thescreamonline.com/carto...3-3/index.html Guy sees how outrageous he can make his credit card signature before it gets rejected. Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Carol wrote:
> Know what would be fun? Pick someone (who has a list with them) at random > when you walk into the store and follow them around. Buy everything that > they buy and get in line behind them. You get the benefit of a well > thought-out list, and you've gotten to make someone paranoid, all in one > fell swoop. Well...you'd have to pick your guide carefully, or you'd end up with a cart full of Mac-n-Cheez-Flavored-Food-Product, frozen pizza, Hydrox, canned spinach, instant tea, and Preparation H. If you really wanted to add to the fun, do this at an all-night grocery store where you and your victim are the only customers in the place. Mutter gibberish to yourself the whole time, and snatch at imaginary gnats around your head. Oh, and when the other person heads for the checkout, dash in front of him or her to get checked out first. (Murphy's Law would then dictate that the next time you came home, you'd find that your victim had just moved into the house next door.) Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 17 Jan 2005 16:39:03 -0600, "Bob" > wrote:
>Carol wrote: > >> Know what would be fun? Pick someone (who has a list with them) at random >> when you walk into the store and follow them around. Buy everything that >> they buy and get in line behind them. You get the benefit of a well >> thought-out list, and you've gotten to make someone paranoid, all in one >> fell swoop. > >Well...you'd have to pick your guide carefully, or you'd end up with a cart >full of Mac-n-Cheez-Flavored-Food-Product, frozen pizza, Hydrox, canned >spinach, instant tea, and Preparation H. > >If you really wanted to add to the fun, do this at an all-night grocery >store where you and your victim are the only customers in the place. Mutter >gibberish to yourself the whole time, and snatch at imaginary gnats around >your head. Oh, and when the other person heads for the checkout, dash in >front of him or her to get checked out first. > >(Murphy's Law would then dictate that the next time you came home, you'd >find that your victim had just moved into the house next door.) ROFLMAO! You've left me gasping for air. You should come here, and we can double-team someone. Then we can have a mini-cook-in back at my place. You *do* know the difference between herbs and spices, don't you?  Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 03:36:58 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski" >
wrote: >> By the way, next time you get pregnant, talk to me about equality. >> Again, this does not diminish a need anyone with a permanent or >> temporary disability has, but not every woman can go through pregnancy >> robustly or easily, even if young and healthy at the onset. > >Sure, they may have problems, but so do a lot of people and we all don't get >special parking places. How do we line up the parking spaces. 1 Pregnant >or with babies 2 Arthritics 3 Constipated 4 Old and Bitchy 5 Worked in >the garden and have sore knees. If any of those traits/problems had the potential to bring in money to the store, I do not see anything wrong with the store offering incentives. Stores selectively give goodies to all sorts of folks ...valet parking, discount coupons , ability to shop sales a day earlier, etc. They do not offer them to everyone, just those they think they will make money on. >> Do you consider it unequal if seniors get a discount or a lift to the >> store from the senior apartment complexes in the township minivans? >> They do around here and it pleases me, and I help fund it with my >> prompt and uncomplained about taxes. > >But that is a form of equality. Everyone over a certain age gets the >discount no matter if they are parked close or far or pregnant or not or >male or female. Heck, I'm going to be 60 this year and some places will >give me a discount. I look forward to that day myself, but am still not bothered by any private store offering incentives to shop, whether they are parking places or some other perc. If there weren't so many dogfools out there who'd take undue advantage of it, I'd have no problem with a few parking spaces set aside specifically for those who are just under the weather for any reason on any particular day. It is just as nice to the constipated ones or those with sore knees and wouldn't it be sweeter all the way around if such simple kindness could be allotted without others being jealous of the decency or using them unnecessarily. Of course, the stores to not provide these places for anything but the comfort of their own bottom line. boron |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"sf" > wrote in message >> > >> >> So my wife that does not quite qualify for a Handicapped spot >> (congestive >> heart failure) has to walk longer so that a 20 something with a kid can >> park >> closer? > > Your wife certainly DOES qualify. Did I say she didn't? No, but we've not persued it. She does not want it yet. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"The Real Bev" > wrote in message >> >> I've seen couples do the equivalent thing. The woman will pull 12 >> items out of the cart, pay for them, and then stand at the end of the >> aisle waiting while her boyfriend pulls the remaining 12 items out of >> the cart and pays for them. Then they put all the grocery bags into >> the cart and walk out of the store together, load everything into >> their car, and drive home. > > I don't see the problem here. Is there one? > > -- > Cheers, Bev Perfectly legal, but it still defeats the purpose of having a speed checkout. Sort of like when a confessed felon gets out of jail because of a minor technicality. They are still guilty. Splitting an order is legal, but not mannerly. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"The Real Bev" > wrote in message >> >> I've seen couples do the equivalent thing. The woman will pull 12 >> items out of the cart, pay for them, and then stand at the end of the >> aisle waiting while her boyfriend pulls the remaining 12 items out of >> the cart and pays for them. Then they put all the grocery bags into >> the cart and walk out of the store together, load everything into >> their car, and drive home. > > I don't see the problem here. Is there one? > > -- > Cheers, Bev Perfectly legal, but it still defeats the purpose of having a speed checkout. Sort of like when a confessed felon gets out of jail because of a minor technicality. They are still guilty. Splitting an order is legal, but not mannerly. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In > posted on
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:29:58 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >The Ranger > wrote in >message ... >> Rod Speed > wrote >>> The Ranger > wrote >>>> Melba's Jammin' > wrote >>>>> George > wrote > >>>>>> Abuse of Express X-items-or-less Lane elided > >>>>> Pity the checker-outer didn't speak first. > >>>> And get publicly reprimanded (or lose his/her job) >>>> because the self-centered, Yes -- As A Matter of >>>> Fact -- Your Universe Does Revolve Around Me, >>>> "customer" chose to break an unenforceable policy? > >>> Mindless stuff. Of course its enforceable. No store >>> has any legal obligation to accept a particular customer >>> whose behaviour is unacceptible as long as that isnt >>> done on the basis of race etc. > >> No store has a legal obligation to stay in business, either, > >No store is gunna go out of business enforcing express >lane rules, as long as that is done sensibly and isnt done >when the customer is only an item or two over the limit. > >> and negative press will assure that occurs. > >Complete and utter drivel. Its likely to ATTRACT >customers to that store when they know that the >express lane wont have arseholes that are well >over the limit in it except when its empty etc. > >> Negative "stories" (experiences) are spread quicker >> than any positive experiences by a 10:1 ratio. > >True in spades when the express lane limits ARENT enforced, stupid. > >> Every person a manager or clerk ****es off will immediately, >> and often indefinitely, go tell a twisted tale of woe to >> everyone (friend and stranger, it won't matter) that >> doesn't make haste trying to get away from them. > >Mindless silly stuff, like the original. > >> And those same reluctant listeners will spread that 2nd-hand tale of >> woe to another 10 people, personalizing it to draw in more listeners. > >They're MUCH more likely to spread the word that the >express lane rules are adhered to in the particular store. > >> Pretty soon the store doesn't have enough customers >> to stay open because they rigidly enforced some rules. > >Never said a word about rigidly. > >> That's why no one wants to be an >> ogre about express lane enforcement. > >Never said a word about an ogre either. > >> They _will_ miss that customer's money -- and >> everyone that believed her story and stayed away. > >And they'll gain the customers who use the express lanes and >like to see them used only by customers who are in a hurry. > >>>> The only time I saw a manager move a customer with >>>> too many items from an express lane to the end of >>>> another line was when he was moving on to another >>>> job. He got a round of applause from those of us in >>>> both express lanes. (Lucky's, 8/91, White and Alum >>>> Rock.) > >>> Then that is obviously why arseholes have noticed >>> they can get away with flouting the express lane rule. > >> Right... > >Fraid so. > Totally agree with this post. The problem is that every time that someone is allowed through with more than the allowed items, especially when they grossly violate the rule, other shoppers notice and they will do the same if they think they can get away with it. I can think of one possible solution, though. Stores have various code words or numbers to alert staff of suspected shoplifters, etc. When a customer tries to break the maximum item rule, the checkout clerk could politely explain that he or she cannot authorize any exceptions to the rule, and offer to page the manager, as only he can make such exceptions. They can then ask the customer to wait for the manager who can sort out the problem. The clerk then makes an announcement "Code 13, register 6" or something similar. The customer thinks this is a request for the manager to attend. It is, in a way. It is a code to request the manager to deal with a selfish asshole on register 6, but only after a 20 or 30 minute delay. The customer then has the choice of standing there looking like a shag on a rock and feeling increasingly embarrassed as others wonder why she is standing to one side without checking out. Alternatively, she can return the excess items to the shelf until she gets down to the required limit, or she can check out through a regular line, not the express line. This should be even more effective if she has a couple of bratty kids with her who would quickly get bored, and start demanding tempting items found near checkouts. Alternatively, it should also work if she had to get back to her office job. When I first arrived in Australia supermarkets were only open from 9 to 5 on weekdays and until noon on Saturday. A single person who worked the same hours often had to shop in their lunch hours. These days, though, we have late night shopping on Thursday nights and large supermarkets open and close later, often trading all day Saturday. In some localities they may even open Sundays. Therefore there seems to be little excuse for anyone having to shop in their lunch hour, at least having to shop for more than a very few items which do qualify for the use of express lanes. Regards, "nilkids" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In > posted on
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:29:58 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >The Ranger > wrote in >message ... >> Rod Speed > wrote >>> The Ranger > wrote >>>> Melba's Jammin' > wrote >>>>> George > wrote > >>>>>> Abuse of Express X-items-or-less Lane elided > >>>>> Pity the checker-outer didn't speak first. > >>>> And get publicly reprimanded (or lose his/her job) >>>> because the self-centered, Yes -- As A Matter of >>>> Fact -- Your Universe Does Revolve Around Me, >>>> "customer" chose to break an unenforceable policy? > >>> Mindless stuff. Of course its enforceable. No store >>> has any legal obligation to accept a particular customer >>> whose behaviour is unacceptible as long as that isnt >>> done on the basis of race etc. > >> No store has a legal obligation to stay in business, either, > >No store is gunna go out of business enforcing express >lane rules, as long as that is done sensibly and isnt done >when the customer is only an item or two over the limit. > >> and negative press will assure that occurs. > >Complete and utter drivel. Its likely to ATTRACT >customers to that store when they know that the >express lane wont have arseholes that are well >over the limit in it except when its empty etc. > >> Negative "stories" (experiences) are spread quicker >> than any positive experiences by a 10:1 ratio. > >True in spades when the express lane limits ARENT enforced, stupid. > >> Every person a manager or clerk ****es off will immediately, >> and often indefinitely, go tell a twisted tale of woe to >> everyone (friend and stranger, it won't matter) that >> doesn't make haste trying to get away from them. > >Mindless silly stuff, like the original. > >> And those same reluctant listeners will spread that 2nd-hand tale of >> woe to another 10 people, personalizing it to draw in more listeners. > >They're MUCH more likely to spread the word that the >express lane rules are adhered to in the particular store. > >> Pretty soon the store doesn't have enough customers >> to stay open because they rigidly enforced some rules. > >Never said a word about rigidly. > >> That's why no one wants to be an >> ogre about express lane enforcement. > >Never said a word about an ogre either. > >> They _will_ miss that customer's money -- and >> everyone that believed her story and stayed away. > >And they'll gain the customers who use the express lanes and >like to see them used only by customers who are in a hurry. > >>>> The only time I saw a manager move a customer with >>>> too many items from an express lane to the end of >>>> another line was when he was moving on to another >>>> job. He got a round of applause from those of us in >>>> both express lanes. (Lucky's, 8/91, White and Alum >>>> Rock.) > >>> Then that is obviously why arseholes have noticed >>> they can get away with flouting the express lane rule. > >> Right... > >Fraid so. > Totally agree with this post. The problem is that every time that someone is allowed through with more than the allowed items, especially when they grossly violate the rule, other shoppers notice and they will do the same if they think they can get away with it. I can think of one possible solution, though. Stores have various code words or numbers to alert staff of suspected shoplifters, etc. When a customer tries to break the maximum item rule, the checkout clerk could politely explain that he or she cannot authorize any exceptions to the rule, and offer to page the manager, as only he can make such exceptions. They can then ask the customer to wait for the manager who can sort out the problem. The clerk then makes an announcement "Code 13, register 6" or something similar. The customer thinks this is a request for the manager to attend. It is, in a way. It is a code to request the manager to deal with a selfish asshole on register 6, but only after a 20 or 30 minute delay. The customer then has the choice of standing there looking like a shag on a rock and feeling increasingly embarrassed as others wonder why she is standing to one side without checking out. Alternatively, she can return the excess items to the shelf until she gets down to the required limit, or she can check out through a regular line, not the express line. This should be even more effective if she has a couple of bratty kids with her who would quickly get bored, and start demanding tempting items found near checkouts. Alternatively, it should also work if she had to get back to her office job. When I first arrived in Australia supermarkets were only open from 9 to 5 on weekdays and until noon on Saturday. A single person who worked the same hours often had to shop in their lunch hours. These days, though, we have late night shopping on Thursday nights and large supermarkets open and close later, often trading all day Saturday. In some localities they may even open Sundays. Therefore there seems to be little excuse for anyone having to shop in their lunch hour, at least having to shop for more than a very few items which do qualify for the use of express lanes. Regards, "nilkids" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"The Real Bev" > wrote in message >> > >> >>I've never seen spots like that. Real gimpspots or regular parking, >> ^^^^^^^^^ >> Excuse me? > > Handicapped parking spots. My mom and mom-in-law are eligible. That's > what we call them. > > -- > Cheers, > Bev Oh my, you probably use horrid terminology like calling a hearing impaired person "deaf" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"The Real Bev" > wrote in message >> > >> >>I've never seen spots like that. Real gimpspots or regular parking, >> ^^^^^^^^^ >> Excuse me? > > Handicapped parking spots. My mom and mom-in-law are eligible. That's > what we call them. > > -- > Cheers, > Bev Oh my, you probably use horrid terminology like calling a hearing impaired person "deaf" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In > posted on
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:29:58 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >The Ranger > wrote in >message ... >> Rod Speed > wrote >>> The Ranger > wrote >>>> Melba's Jammin' > wrote >>>>> George > wrote > >>>>>> Abuse of Express X-items-or-less Lane elided > >>>>> Pity the checker-outer didn't speak first. > >>>> And get publicly reprimanded (or lose his/her job) >>>> because the self-centered, Yes -- As A Matter of >>>> Fact -- Your Universe Does Revolve Around Me, >>>> "customer" chose to break an unenforceable policy? > >>> Mindless stuff. Of course its enforceable. No store >>> has any legal obligation to accept a particular customer >>> whose behaviour is unacceptible as long as that isnt >>> done on the basis of race etc. > >> No store has a legal obligation to stay in business, either, > >No store is gunna go out of business enforcing express >lane rules, as long as that is done sensibly and isnt done >when the customer is only an item or two over the limit. > >> and negative press will assure that occurs. > >Complete and utter drivel. Its likely to ATTRACT >customers to that store when they know that the >express lane wont have arseholes that are well >over the limit in it except when its empty etc. > >> Negative "stories" (experiences) are spread quicker >> than any positive experiences by a 10:1 ratio. > >True in spades when the express lane limits ARENT enforced, stupid. > >> Every person a manager or clerk ****es off will immediately, >> and often indefinitely, go tell a twisted tale of woe to >> everyone (friend and stranger, it won't matter) that >> doesn't make haste trying to get away from them. > >Mindless silly stuff, like the original. > >> And those same reluctant listeners will spread that 2nd-hand tale of >> woe to another 10 people, personalizing it to draw in more listeners. > >They're MUCH more likely to spread the word that the >express lane rules are adhered to in the particular store. > >> Pretty soon the store doesn't have enough customers >> to stay open because they rigidly enforced some rules. > >Never said a word about rigidly. > >> That's why no one wants to be an >> ogre about express lane enforcement. > >Never said a word about an ogre either. > >> They _will_ miss that customer's money -- and >> everyone that believed her story and stayed away. > >And they'll gain the customers who use the express lanes and >like to see them used only by customers who are in a hurry. > >>>> The only time I saw a manager move a customer with >>>> too many items from an express lane to the end of >>>> another line was when he was moving on to another >>>> job. He got a round of applause from those of us in >>>> both express lanes. (Lucky's, 8/91, White and Alum >>>> Rock.) > >>> Then that is obviously why arseholes have noticed >>> they can get away with flouting the express lane rule. > >> Right... > >Fraid so. > Totally agree with this post. The problem is that every time that someone is allowed through with more than the allowed items, especially when they grossly violate the rule, other shoppers notice and they will do the same if they think they can get away with it. I can think of one possible solution, though. Stores have various code words or numbers to alert staff of suspected shoplifters, etc. When a customer tries to break the maximum item rule, the checkout clerk could politely explain that he or she cannot authorize any exceptions to the rule, and offer to page the manager, as only he can make such exceptions. They can then ask the customer to wait for the manager who can sort out the problem. The clerk then makes an announcement "Code 13, register 6" or something similar. The customer thinks this is a request for the manager to attend. It is, in a way. It is a code to request the manager to deal with a selfish asshole on register 6, but only after a 20 or 30 minute delay. The customer then has the choice of standing there looking like a shag on a rock and feeling increasingly embarrassed as others wonder why she is standing to one side without checking out. Alternatively, she can return the excess items to the shelf until she gets down to the required limit, or she can check out through a regular line, not the express line. This should be even more effective if she has a couple of bratty kids with her who would quickly get bored, and start demanding tempting items found near checkouts. Alternatively, it should also work if she had to get back to her office job. When I first arrived in Australia supermarkets were only open from 9 to 5 on weekdays and until noon on Saturday. A single person who worked the same hours often had to shop in their lunch hours. These days, though, we have late night shopping on Thursday nights and large supermarkets open and close later, often trading all day Saturday. In some localities they may even open Sundays. Therefore there seems to be little excuse for anyone having to shop in their lunch hour, at least having to shop for more than a very few items which do qualify for the use of express lanes. Regards, "nilkids" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In > posted on
Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:29:58 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >The Ranger > wrote in >message ... >> Rod Speed > wrote >>> The Ranger > wrote >>>> Melba's Jammin' > wrote >>>>> George > wrote > >>>>>> Abuse of Express X-items-or-less Lane elided > >>>>> Pity the checker-outer didn't speak first. > >>>> And get publicly reprimanded (or lose his/her job) >>>> because the self-centered, Yes -- As A Matter of >>>> Fact -- Your Universe Does Revolve Around Me, >>>> "customer" chose to break an unenforceable policy? > >>> Mindless stuff. Of course its enforceable. No store >>> has any legal obligation to accept a particular customer >>> whose behaviour is unacceptible as long as that isnt >>> done on the basis of race etc. > >> No store has a legal obligation to stay in business, either, > >No store is gunna go out of business enforcing express >lane rules, as long as that is done sensibly and isnt done >when the customer is only an item or two over the limit. > >> and negative press will assure that occurs. > >Complete and utter drivel. Its likely to ATTRACT >customers to that store when they know that the >express lane wont have arseholes that are well >over the limit in it except when its empty etc. > >> Negative "stories" (experiences) are spread quicker >> than any positive experiences by a 10:1 ratio. > >True in spades when the express lane limits ARENT enforced, stupid. > >> Every person a manager or clerk ****es off will immediately, >> and often indefinitely, go tell a twisted tale of woe to >> everyone (friend and stranger, it won't matter) that >> doesn't make haste trying to get away from them. > >Mindless silly stuff, like the original. > >> And those same reluctant listeners will spread that 2nd-hand tale of >> woe to another 10 people, personalizing it to draw in more listeners. > >They're MUCH more likely to spread the word that the >express lane rules are adhered to in the particular store. > >> Pretty soon the store doesn't have enough customers >> to stay open because they rigidly enforced some rules. > >Never said a word about rigidly. > >> That's why no one wants to be an >> ogre about express lane enforcement. > >Never said a word about an ogre either. > >> They _will_ miss that customer's money -- and >> everyone that believed her story and stayed away. > >And they'll gain the customers who use the express lanes and >like to see them used only by customers who are in a hurry. > >>>> The only time I saw a manager move a customer with >>>> too many items from an express lane to the end of >>>> another line was when he was moving on to another >>>> job. He got a round of applause from those of us in >>>> both express lanes. (Lucky's, 8/91, White and Alum >>>> Rock.) > >>> Then that is obviously why arseholes have noticed >>> they can get away with flouting the express lane rule. > >> Right... > >Fraid so. > Totally agree with this post. The problem is that every time that someone is allowed through with more than the allowed items, especially when they grossly violate the rule, other shoppers notice and they will do the same if they think they can get away with it. I can think of one possible solution, though. Stores have various code words or numbers to alert staff of suspected shoplifters, etc. When a customer tries to break the maximum item rule, the checkout clerk could politely explain that he or she cannot authorize any exceptions to the rule, and offer to page the manager, as only he can make such exceptions. They can then ask the customer to wait for the manager who can sort out the problem. The clerk then makes an announcement "Code 13, register 6" or something similar. The customer thinks this is a request for the manager to attend. It is, in a way. It is a code to request the manager to deal with a selfish asshole on register 6, but only after a 20 or 30 minute delay. The customer then has the choice of standing there looking like a shag on a rock and feeling increasingly embarrassed as others wonder why she is standing to one side without checking out. Alternatively, she can return the excess items to the shelf until she gets down to the required limit, or she can check out through a regular line, not the express line. This should be even more effective if she has a couple of bratty kids with her who would quickly get bored, and start demanding tempting items found near checkouts. Alternatively, it should also work if she had to get back to her office job. When I first arrived in Australia supermarkets were only open from 9 to 5 on weekdays and until noon on Saturday. A single person who worked the same hours often had to shop in their lunch hours. These days, though, we have late night shopping on Thursday nights and large supermarkets open and close later, often trading all day Saturday. In some localities they may even open Sundays. Therefore there seems to be little excuse for anyone having to shop in their lunch hour, at least having to shop for more than a very few items which do qualify for the use of express lanes. Regards, "nilkids" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> wrote in message ... > In > posted on > Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:29:58 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >> >>The Ranger > wrote in >>message ... >>> Rod Speed > wrote >>>> The Ranger > wrote >>>>> Melba's Jammin' > wrote >>>>>> George > wrote >> >>>>>>> Abuse of Express X-items-or-less Lane elided >> >>>>>> Pity the checker-outer didn't speak first. >> >>>>> And get publicly reprimanded (or lose his/her job) >>>>> because the self-centered, Yes -- As A Matter of >>>>> Fact -- Your Universe Does Revolve Around Me, >>>>> "customer" chose to break an unenforceable policy? >> >>>> Mindless stuff. Of course its enforceable. No store >>>> has any legal obligation to accept a particular customer >>>> whose behaviour is unacceptible as long as that isnt >>>> done on the basis of race etc. >> >>> No store has a legal obligation to stay in business, either, >> >>No store is gunna go out of business enforcing express >>lane rules, as long as that is done sensibly and isnt done >>when the customer is only an item or two over the limit. >> >>> and negative press will assure that occurs. >> >>Complete and utter drivel. Its likely to ATTRACT >>customers to that store when they know that the >>express lane wont have arseholes that are well >>over the limit in it except when its empty etc. >> >>> Negative "stories" (experiences) are spread quicker >>> than any positive experiences by a 10:1 ratio. >> >>True in spades when the express lane limits ARENT enforced, stupid. >> >>> Every person a manager or clerk ****es off will immediately, >>> and often indefinitely, go tell a twisted tale of woe to >>> everyone (friend and stranger, it won't matter) that >>> doesn't make haste trying to get away from them. >> >>Mindless silly stuff, like the original. >> >>> And those same reluctant listeners will spread that 2nd-hand tale of >>> woe to another 10 people, personalizing it to draw in more listeners. >> >>They're MUCH more likely to spread the word that the >>express lane rules are adhered to in the particular store. >> >>> Pretty soon the store doesn't have enough customers >>> to stay open because they rigidly enforced some rules. >> >>Never said a word about rigidly. >> >>> That's why no one wants to be an >>> ogre about express lane enforcement. >> >>Never said a word about an ogre either. >> >>> They _will_ miss that customer's money -- and >>> everyone that believed her story and stayed away. >> >>And they'll gain the customers who use the express lanes and >>like to see them used only by customers who are in a hurry. >> >>>>> The only time I saw a manager move a customer with >>>>> too many items from an express lane to the end of >>>>> another line was when he was moving on to another >>>>> job. He got a round of applause from those of us in >>>>> both express lanes. (Lucky's, 8/91, White and Alum >>>>> Rock.) >> >>>> Then that is obviously why arseholes have noticed >>>> they can get away with flouting the express lane rule. >> >>> Right... >> >>Fraid so. >> > Totally agree with this post. The problem is that every > time that someone is allowed through with more than the > allowed items, especially when they grossly violate the > rule, other shoppers notice and they will do the same if > they think they can get away with it. > > I can think of one possible solution, though. Stores have > various code words or numbers to alert staff of suspected > shoplifters, etc. > > When a customer tries to break the maximum item rule, the > checkout clerk could politely explain that he or she cannot > authorize any exceptions to the rule, and offer to page the > manager, as only he can make such exceptions. They can then > ask the customer to wait for the manager who can sort out > the problem. > > The clerk then makes an announcement "Code 13, register 6" > or something similar. The customer thinks this is a request > for the manager to attend. It is, in a way. It is a code > to request the manager to deal with a selfish asshole on > register 6, but only after a 20 or 30 minute delay. > > The customer then has the choice of standing there looking > like a shag on a rock and feeling increasingly embarrassed > as others wonder why she is standing to one side without > checking out. > > Alternatively, she can return the excess items to the shelf > until she gets down to the required limit, or she can check > out through a regular line, not the express line. > > This should be even more effective if she has a couple of > bratty kids with her who would quickly get bored, and start > demanding tempting items found near checkouts. > > Alternatively, it should also work if she had to get back to > her office job. Yeah, that should work. > When I first arrived in Australia supermarkets were only > open from 9 to 5 on weekdays and until noon on Saturday. When was this ? That wasnt true in the 60s for example. > A single person who worked the same hours > often had to shop in their lunch hours. > These days, though, we have late night shopping > on Thursday nights and large supermarkets open > and close later, often trading all day Saturday. In > some localities they may even open Sundays. And some are open 24/7 now. > Therefore there seems to be little excuse for anyone having > to shop in their lunch hour, at least having to shop for > more than a very few items which do qualify for the use of > express lanes. Yeah, tho there is no good reason for paying bills in person either, yet plenty are silly enough to do that. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> wrote in message ... > In > posted on > Mon, 17 Jan 2005 08:29:58 +1100, Rod Speed wrote: > >> >>The Ranger > wrote in >>message ... >>> Rod Speed > wrote >>>> The Ranger > wrote >>>>> Melba's Jammin' > wrote >>>>>> George > wrote >> >>>>>>> Abuse of Express X-items-or-less Lane elided >> >>>>>> Pity the checker-outer didn't speak first. >> >>>>> And get publicly reprimanded (or lose his/her job) >>>>> because the self-centered, Yes -- As A Matter of >>>>> Fact -- Your Universe Does Revolve Around Me, >>>>> "customer" chose to break an unenforceable policy? >> >>>> Mindless stuff. Of course its enforceable. No store >>>> has any legal obligation to accept a particular customer >>>> whose behaviour is unacceptible as long as that isnt >>>> done on the basis of race etc. >> >>> No store has a legal obligation to stay in business, either, >> >>No store is gunna go out of business enforcing express >>lane rules, as long as that is done sensibly and isnt done >>when the customer is only an item or two over the limit. >> >>> and negative press will assure that occurs. >> >>Complete and utter drivel. Its likely to ATTRACT >>customers to that store when they know that the >>express lane wont have arseholes that are well >>over the limit in it except when its empty etc. >> >>> Negative "stories" (experiences) are spread quicker >>> than any positive experiences by a 10:1 ratio. >> >>True in spades when the express lane limits ARENT enforced, stupid. >> >>> Every person a manager or clerk ****es off will immediately, >>> and often indefinitely, go tell a twisted tale of woe to >>> everyone (friend and stranger, it won't matter) that >>> doesn't make haste trying to get away from them. >> >>Mindless silly stuff, like the original. >> >>> And those same reluctant listeners will spread that 2nd-hand tale of >>> woe to another 10 people, personalizing it to draw in more listeners. >> >>They're MUCH more likely to spread the word that the >>express lane rules are adhered to in the particular store. >> >>> Pretty soon the store doesn't have enough customers >>> to stay open because they rigidly enforced some rules. >> >>Never said a word about rigidly. >> >>> That's why no one wants to be an >>> ogre about express lane enforcement. >> >>Never said a word about an ogre either. >> >>> They _will_ miss that customer's money -- and >>> everyone that believed her story and stayed away. >> >>And they'll gain the customers who use the express lanes and >>like to see them used only by customers who are in a hurry. >> >>>>> The only time I saw a manager move a customer with >>>>> too many items from an express lane to the end of >>>>> another line was when he was moving on to another >>>>> job. He got a round of applause from those of us in >>>>> both express lanes. (Lucky's, 8/91, White and Alum >>>>> Rock.) >> >>>> Then that is obviously why arseholes have noticed >>>> they can get away with flouting the express lane rule. >> >>> Right... >> >>Fraid so. >> > Totally agree with this post. The problem is that every > time that someone is allowed through with more than the > allowed items, especially when they grossly violate the > rule, other shoppers notice and they will do the same if > they think they can get away with it. > > I can think of one possible solution, though. Stores have > various code words or numbers to alert staff of suspected > shoplifters, etc. > > When a customer tries to break the maximum item rule, the > checkout clerk could politely explain that he or she cannot > authorize any exceptions to the rule, and offer to page the > manager, as only he can make such exceptions. They can then > ask the customer to wait for the manager who can sort out > the problem. > > The clerk then makes an announcement "Code 13, register 6" > or something similar. The customer thinks this is a request > for the manager to attend. It is, in a way. It is a code > to request the manager to deal with a selfish asshole on > register 6, but only after a 20 or 30 minute delay. > > The customer then has the choice of standing there looking > like a shag on a rock and feeling increasingly embarrassed > as others wonder why she is standing to one side without > checking out. > > Alternatively, she can return the excess items to the shelf > until she gets down to the required limit, or she can check > out through a regular line, not the express line. > > This should be even more effective if she has a couple of > bratty kids with her who would quickly get bored, and start > demanding tempting items found near checkouts. > > Alternatively, it should also work if she had to get back to > her office job. Yeah, that should work. > When I first arrived in Australia supermarkets were only > open from 9 to 5 on weekdays and until noon on Saturday. When was this ? That wasnt true in the 60s for example. > A single person who worked the same hours > often had to shop in their lunch hours. > These days, though, we have late night shopping > on Thursday nights and large supermarkets open > and close later, often trading all day Saturday. In > some localities they may even open Sundays. And some are open 24/7 now. > Therefore there seems to be little excuse for anyone having > to shop in their lunch hour, at least having to shop for > more than a very few items which do qualify for the use of > express lanes. Yeah, tho there is no good reason for paying bills in person either, yet plenty are silly enough to do that. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
>"Edwin Pawlowski" writes:
> >"The Real Bev" wrote: >>> > >>> >>I've never seen spots like that. Real gimpspots or regular parking, >>> >>> Excuse me? >> >> Handicapped parking spots. My mom and mom-in-law are eligible. That's >> what we call them. > >Oh my, you probably use horrid terminology like calling a hearing impaired >person "deaf" Well, in NYC there's all sorts of nomenclature for sight impaired/blind drivers... ask any cabbie. hehe ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- ********* "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." Sheldon ```````````` |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
PENMART01 wrote:
>>notbob smarms: >> >> >>>PENMART01 wrote: >>> >>>cash I pay less, with large purchases *substantially* less.... you >> >>obviously >> >>>have never paid cash for a new car.... >> >>We're talking grocery stores. Cars are not grocery stores. > > > Had you not snipped the relevant portions everyone would see that the topic had > moved on to paying with cash in general, and acquiring and carrying cash (your > own input). How did you derive that ones personal discretionary cash is for > purchasing food only. duh > > >>BTW, I've always paid cash for all my cars. > > > Now you interject that, just because I did... sheesh, can't you think for > yourself... too late, you're not believeable... but I won't say you're a liar > because you probably did pay cash for all your cars, a couple hundred bucks for > some old clunkers.... notice I said "new car", you were careful to omit the > word "new". > > I have a very good friend who owns a Jeep dealership... I've been informed (and > posted this previously) that more than 87% of new cars on the road lately are > leased. The rest are purchased with minimal down payments and personal loans. > Less than 5% of late model automobile titles (4 yrs or less) list no > lienholder. Less than 1/2% of new cars sales are paid for in cash. > > You don't own a car, or it's some old clunker... those who scrounge cash from > ATMs and change back on grocery purchases on a daily basis typically own > nothing, their debts own them. > > > ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- > ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- > ********* > "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." > Sheldon > ```````````` Very true. I look around my neighborhood, and I see extravagant homes, with beautiful landscapes, and sometimes an indoor pool. Now pass by at night, and you'll see the BMW's, et cetera outside. Pass by during the day, and there is no one friggin home. Why, cause they are working their long hours (asses) (both husband, and wife,) to pay for their lame attempt to live like "kings." I have a car that I lease (I trade it in every 4 years because I like having something brand new,) for my wife (Audi A6.) I love the fact that it's superb handler of the road as well as damn comfortable. But the main reason is the extra protection it offers for my family. Me, I drive a 94 Toyota 4 Runner which was financed with a low % home equity loan (tax deductible) and has been paid for a long time ago. I call it my NY car because I really don't care how many extra scratches you give it. It was baptized with scratches and dents (thanks to Maimonides parking lot and streets,) the first week I brought it to NY. In the Summer of this year, after my business debt is completely abolished, I'm planning on buying a car with my Amex card, and at the end of the month, pay the whole thing off. Yeah, that really ****es the credit card companies when their patrons do that. If you look around with out too much strain, you can easily see that banks own mostly everything, not your run of the mill person living in Americana Suburbia. Rich -- "Dum Spiro, Spero." As long as I breath, I hope. Cicero (Ancient Rome) ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤° `°¤ø,¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸. ><((((º> ·´¯`·. , .·´¯`·.. ><((((º> Let there be fish!!! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
PENMART01 wrote:
>>notbob smarms: >> >> >>>PENMART01 wrote: >>> >>>cash I pay less, with large purchases *substantially* less.... you >> >>obviously >> >>>have never paid cash for a new car.... >> >>We're talking grocery stores. Cars are not grocery stores. > > > Had you not snipped the relevant portions everyone would see that the topic had > moved on to paying with cash in general, and acquiring and carrying cash (your > own input). How did you derive that ones personal discretionary cash is for > purchasing food only. duh > > >>BTW, I've always paid cash for all my cars. > > > Now you interject that, just because I did... sheesh, can't you think for > yourself... too late, you're not believeable... but I won't say you're a liar > because you probably did pay cash for all your cars, a couple hundred bucks for > some old clunkers.... notice I said "new car", you were careful to omit the > word "new". > > I have a very good friend who owns a Jeep dealership... I've been informed (and > posted this previously) that more than 87% of new cars on the road lately are > leased. The rest are purchased with minimal down payments and personal loans. > Less than 5% of late model automobile titles (4 yrs or less) list no > lienholder. Less than 1/2% of new cars sales are paid for in cash. > > You don't own a car, or it's some old clunker... those who scrounge cash from > ATMs and change back on grocery purchases on a daily basis typically own > nothing, their debts own them. > > > ---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =--- > ---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =--- > ********* > "Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation." > Sheldon > ```````````` Very true. I look around my neighborhood, and I see extravagant homes, with beautiful landscapes, and sometimes an indoor pool. Now pass by at night, and you'll see the BMW's, et cetera outside. Pass by during the day, and there is no one friggin home. Why, cause they are working their long hours (asses) (both husband, and wife,) to pay for their lame attempt to live like "kings." I have a car that I lease (I trade it in every 4 years because I like having something brand new,) for my wife (Audi A6.) I love the fact that it's superb handler of the road as well as damn comfortable. But the main reason is the extra protection it offers for my family. Me, I drive a 94 Toyota 4 Runner which was financed with a low % home equity loan (tax deductible) and has been paid for a long time ago. I call it my NY car because I really don't care how many extra scratches you give it. It was baptized with scratches and dents (thanks to Maimonides parking lot and streets,) the first week I brought it to NY. In the Summer of this year, after my business debt is completely abolished, I'm planning on buying a car with my Amex card, and at the end of the month, pay the whole thing off. Yeah, that really ****es the credit card companies when their patrons do that. If you look around with out too much strain, you can easily see that banks own mostly everything, not your run of the mill person living in Americana Suburbia. Rich -- "Dum Spiro, Spero." As long as I breath, I hope. Cicero (Ancient Rome) ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸¸¸,ø¤° `°¤ø,¸¸,ø¤°`°¤ø ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·.¸. ><((((º> ·´¯`·. , .·´¯`·.. ><((((º> Let there be fish!!! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 01:38:47 GMT, Hahabogus >
wrote: >zxcvbob > wrote in : > >> P.S. I rented "Fargo" tonight, cuz it just seemed appropriate when >> it's -15° outside. >> >> > >I laugh HAHA HOHO at your -15F it is -25F here -40F with windchill. And I laugh at your -25°F and laugh even harder at the -40°F! It was +79°F here in SoCal, Harry. Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd...ducking and running AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA "If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner." -- Duncan Hines To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 09:58:39 -0500, Tony P.
> wrote: >In article >, says... >> On 17 Jan 2005 03:52:40 GMT, (PENMART01) wrote: >> >> >You're so negative... you are obviously poor... indebted peasants typically >> >> Hey, congratulations everyone! We got in eleven layers before the thread >> became completely unreadable! Well done!>> >> > >I love thread drift. It's so much fun to watch the vicious people come >out. Especially when the cross-posters get their nasty little keyboards humming. It is a source of fascination to me the disparate newsgroups that wind up involved in a thread. Here's the latest "group count" on this thread: misc.consumers,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.support.childfree,rec.food.cooking,alt. gossip.celebrities <head shaking> Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd AAC(F)BV66.0748.CA "If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner." -- Duncan Hines To reply, replace "spaminator" with "cox" |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:44:02 -0800, Terry Pulliam Burd
> wrote: >Here's the latest "group count" on this thread: > > >misc.consumers,misc.consumers.frugal-living,alt.support.childfree,rec.food.cooking,alt. gossip.celebrities > ><head shaking> I've got Agent set up so that my replies to cross-posted messages will only be sent to the newsgroup I'm reading. If anyone needs help finding that, I'll be happy to help. Carol -- "Years ago my mother used to say to me... She'd say, 'In this world Elwood, you must be oh-so smart or oh-so pleasant.' Well, for years I was smart.... I recommend pleasant. You may quote me." *James Stewart* in the 1950 movie, _Harvey_ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In rec.food.cooking, Richard Periut > wrote:
> Why, cause they are working their > long hours (asses) (both husband, and wife,) to pay for their lame > attempt to live like "kings." > I have a car that I lease (I trade it in every 4 years because I like > having something brand new,) My Irony Meter just hit the peg. > main reason is the extra protection it offers for my family. That's what they all say. > abolished, I'm planning on buying a car with my Amex card, If the dealer lets you do that, it is only because you overpaid enough already to cover the merchant fee. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:48:10 -0500, Boron Elgar
> wrote: > Of course, the stores to not provide these places for anything but the > comfort of their own bottom line. Or (in my area) the law. sf |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 14:32:15 -0600, Damsel
> wrote: > My herbs and spices are no longer alphabetized. They're on turntables (Of > course, there's one turntable for herbs and one for spices. Heaven help > the house guest who wants to prepare a meal and doesn't know the > difference). <G> > > I no longer hang my clothes according to type (blouses, skirts, pants, > blazers) and then again by color (in rainbow order - reds, oranges, > yellows, greens, etc.) within each type. By type is a good idea. By > color is overboard for me now, but I sure understand if someone else needs > things to be that way. > I hate to say this, but everyting you listed as bad - sounds very logical to me. I don't alphabetize my herbs & spices, but I think separating by type makes sense... and when I get around to organizing my closet (once every hundred years or so), I organize it by color. Hey, can you redistribute any of the neat & orderly part you don't want to use so the rest of us slobs might have a chance at redemption? If you do, our moms can pay us a surprise visit and we won't have to close any doors. sf |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Carol replied:
>> If you really wanted to add to the fun, do this at an all-night grocery >> store where you and your victim are the only customers in the place. >> Mutter gibberish to yourself the whole time, and snatch at imaginary >> gnats around your head. Oh, and when the other person heads for the >> checkout, dash in front of him or her to get checked out first. >> >> (Murphy's Law would then dictate that the next time you came home, you'd >> find that your victim had just moved into the house next door.) > > ROFLMAO! You've left me gasping for air. You should come here, and we > can double-team someone. Then we can have a mini-cook-in back at my > place. You *do* know the difference between herbs and spices, don't you? > Tempting as that sounds, I think you should come *here* instead. It's at least forty degrees warmer here, and my little town has an all-night Safeway which would be perfect for the scheme. Here's a double-team thought for the daytime, when the express lanes are open: I could get twenty different Safeway Club cards, we could pack the shopping cart with a hundred different items, take it into the express lane, and tell the checkout clerk that we want to check out the items in groups of five, using a different club card for each group. I'd pay for the even groups, you'd pay for the odd ones. Explain that we're filling grocery orders for individuals as part of an NRA initiation rite. Ask the clerk if he own any guns: If he says "yes," say "WOO-HOO!" and attempt to high-five him. If he says "no," say, "Oh, I'm so sorry. There's nothing like the feel of a big, POWERFUL gun in your hands." We could even try to pay him with foreign coins -- although it's possible that he'd be so intimidated that he'd let it slide if he *did* notice. ....and to answer your question, yes, I *do* know the difference between herbs and spices, although curry leaves and powdered sage don't seem to belong wherever they get put. Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Carol replied:
>> If you really wanted to add to the fun, do this at an all-night grocery >> store where you and your victim are the only customers in the place. >> Mutter gibberish to yourself the whole time, and snatch at imaginary >> gnats around your head. Oh, and when the other person heads for the >> checkout, dash in front of him or her to get checked out first. >> >> (Murphy's Law would then dictate that the next time you came home, you'd >> find that your victim had just moved into the house next door.) > > ROFLMAO! You've left me gasping for air. You should come here, and we > can double-team someone. Then we can have a mini-cook-in back at my > place. You *do* know the difference between herbs and spices, don't you? > Tempting as that sounds, I think you should come *here* instead. It's at least forty degrees warmer here, and my little town has an all-night Safeway which would be perfect for the scheme. Here's a double-team thought for the daytime, when the express lanes are open: I could get twenty different Safeway Club cards, we could pack the shopping cart with a hundred different items, take it into the express lane, and tell the checkout clerk that we want to check out the items in groups of five, using a different club card for each group. I'd pay for the even groups, you'd pay for the odd ones. Explain that we're filling grocery orders for individuals as part of an NRA initiation rite. Ask the clerk if he own any guns: If he says "yes," say "WOO-HOO!" and attempt to high-five him. If he says "no," say, "Oh, I'm so sorry. There's nothing like the feel of a big, POWERFUL gun in your hands." We could even try to pay him with foreign coins -- although it's possible that he'd be so intimidated that he'd let it slide if he *did* notice. ....and to answer your question, yes, I *do* know the difference between herbs and spices, although curry leaves and powdered sage don't seem to belong wherever they get put. Bob |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In rec.food.cooking, Richard Periut > wrote:
> wrote: > > In rec.food.cooking, Richard Periut > wrote: > > > > > >>Why, cause they are working their > >>long hours (asses) (both husband, and wife,) to pay for their lame > >>attempt to live like "kings." > > > > > >>I have a car that I lease (I trade it in every 4 years because I like > >>having something brand new,) > > > > > > My Irony Meter just hit the peg. > > > > > > > > > >>main reason is the extra protection it offers for my family. > > > > > > That's what they all say. > > > > > > > >>abolished, I'm planning on buying a car with my Amex card, > > > > > > If the dealer lets you do that, it is only because you overpaid enough > > already to cover the merchant fee. > Your generalizations amuse me. You know nothing of who I am, or what I'm > worth, and you post wantonly. I've purchased medical equipment worth 40K > with my AMEX. They usually have me call to verify the purchase and ask > me some questions to confirm ID. Of course, that is way beyond your realm. Again my irony meter hits the peg. The juxtoposition of "You know nothing of who I am..." with "...that is way beyond your realm." is priceless. When you bought that medical equipment, the purchase price included the merchant fee the seller had to fork over to Amex. Cars rarely have enough margin to include such fees, unless, as I said before, you overpay for the car. Give them sticker price, and they will grab your Amex out of your hand and ring it up. Give them $500 over cost, and they will insist on other payment mechanisms. > I don't lease the Audi to show off to others, No, you do it because "I like having something brand new", even as you lambast your neighbors for "their lame attempts to live like 'kings'". Those who wish to minimize their total cost of ownership buy cars for cash and keep them past the steep part of the depreciation curve. Those who wish to live like kings lease cars, every few years, that they otherswise can't afford. Not that there is anything wrong with that, so long as those folks don't look down on their hard-working neighbors and than brag about how thrifty they are. I doit because of the > quality of the car, and the hassle of having it serviced for free, as > well as the reputation. We all know that a late-model Audi is a car fit for a king. That is not in dispute. -- In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. -- Dwight David Eisenhower |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| At the grocery store... | General Cooking | |||
| Saw this at the grocery store | General Cooking | |||
| Our Grocery Store | General Cooking | |||
| Supermarket stories (was Rude at the grocery store) | General Cooking | |||
| Supermarket stories (was Rude at the grocery store) | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
