Many years ago, I worked for various McDonald’s restaurants as a cashier. And occationally, this would happen:
A customer would come to my station and make an order. I would operate strictly by the book; greeting the customer, taking the order, taking the money, assemble the order, and send the customer on her way. The customer would give me absolutely no indication that anything was amiss.
Then, unknown to me, the customer would go behind my back and make a complaint to a manager, claiming that I either got the order wrong in some way (especially when I was in the drive through position) or, more often, that I was rude to her, without specifying how exactly I was rude to her.
The manager would later confront me about the complaint, taking as FACT without question what the customer said and demand of me what the problem was. I would be taken totally by surprize and be unable to offer an explanation for what happened.
In some cases, I would be formally reprimanded by the manager with a written report that would go on my record. I would be presumed guilty until proven innocent.
This sort of treachery shouldn’t be tolerated by any business. I suspect that customers who pull this stunt are trying to scam the restaurant in some way, perhaps to get a free meal. So here is I think what should happen instead.
Customers MUST make a complaint first directly to the employee that offended them. If they fail to do so, management should not be obligated to listen to them.
When complaining of rudeness, the customer MUST specify to both the employee and the manager the rude behavior and give details and suggest how the behavior can be corrected.
When discussing what happened later with the employee, the manager does not reprimand him and takes what he says in equal consideration with what the customer said earlier.
If these rules were followed, then I think employees and management would get along much better and fewer customers would be attempting to scam restaurants or other places of business.
The recent case of Jaycee Lee Dugard, who was kidnapped at age 11 and held prisoner for 18 years and forced to bear two daughters by her kidnappers, bears a striking simularity to another case in Austria, but that one was far worse because it involved incest, lasted longer and involved the birth of seven children. Continue reading →
In the interest in being completely transparent, I’m posting this insane comment I got from some unknown troll, who I think is either an alter-ego of or a close friend of an old enemy of mine:
Author : tangoforever (IP: 220.127.116.11 , cpe-75-84-8-93.socal.res.rr.com)
E-mail : email@example.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=18.104.22.168
To Michael O.
In this thread, as in all of his other threads, Dale Husband presents himself as
a mentally challenged individual. He seems to have a psychotic dispostion. He
statements smack of self serving, grandiose thoughts of himself. His statements
show him to be Narcissistic. Someone to steer away from for sure.
In my opinion, Laci was expressing her honest revulsion at the sexist comments TJ made and it’s clear that as a young woman, she takes it very much to heart any attacks made against women which refer to their body parts. Why should anyone in a debate do that, no matter how offensive the woman’s opinions may be? I might call a woman like Ann Coulter a bitch, but I wouldn’t make specific reference to her breasts or suggest that she should only go shopping. But the fact that Laci used foul language to get her point across as much as TJ did weakens her case against him. Finally, anyone who refers to himself as an “Amazing Atheist” and is not James Randi needs to have his ego smashed. I was repulsed by this guy’s attitude as soon as I started watching his videos. An intellecual, this bozo is NOT!
Last week, as a result of my earlier battle with my former friend Sally H, I became so disgusted with Care2 as a web community that I decided to completely leave it. I transferred ownership of my Evolution Education group to my most trusted and beloved friend Mari Enchanted Basque and deleted my original account.
Immediately there was an outcry from my wife and some of my closest and oldest Care2 friends, who then pleaded with me to return. After a day or so, I relented and formed a new Care2 account to start all over. Mari then appointed me a host and owner of Evolution Education again
Like Silly Old Bear, I am sick unto death of all the conspiracies, backstabbing, and attempts at personal destruction among the current Care2 membership. It is time for the Care2 admin to DRASTICALLY change its policies and work hard to stamp out such behavior if their community is to be a truly safe place in the future for social and political activism. The current policies do not work!
A friend of mine is being repeatedly attacked by certain people because of her posting names and pics of members blocked from her group on Human Rights, along with specific reasons for the blocking. They claim that this act itself violates human rights, as well as rules of proper behavior. But does it?
When challenged to specify what rights are being violated, they refuse to do so.
When they are issued a judgement, they refuse to accept it.
Instead of moving on after they state their case, they keep repeating it, as if saying it 1000 times will make a difference after failing to make their case the first time.
That’s trolling, people.
What’s really going on, with at least some of the critics, is fear of appearing on the list they are protesting about. Well, here’s an idea: Don’t violate the rules of the group and you won’t ever appear on that list!
OK, let me get this straight
First the Bush Adminstration attempts to define the prisoners at Gitmo as neither criminal suspects nor as POWs. It should be noted that the former class are forbidden to be tortured under the Bill of Rights, while the second class are prohibited from being tortured under the Geneva Conventions. Then to cover their @$$es further, the Bush Adminstration attempts to reclassify waterboarding, excluding it as a form of torture.
What is one supposed to conclude from that? You join the points together and thus conclude that waterboarding, and other forms of torture, are probably being done at Gitmo. And do you not think that’s why those prisoners were sent to Gitmo in the first place, to try to prevent the public from seeing what was about to take place there? Even German or Japanese POWs during World War II were never sent to Gitmo.
If such nonsense was ever done to American citizens by any other government, we’d all be howling in protest about it. But we are Americans who were so hurt by 9-11, so we can do whatever we want to anyone we please. We are special! We are better than all other peoples! We can’t trust THEM to live their own lives out without us looking constantly over their shoulders to make sure they do things OUR way. All because a few extremists nuts rammed a few planes into a few buildings, we go ballistic and throw due process out the window and put ourselves in a perpetual state of “war”. Remember, war is good for business too.
Of course, that doesn’t absolutely PROVE that torture and other human rights violations have taken place at Gitmo. But when the police have probable cause that a criminal suspect has committed a crime, even if it wasn’t done openly, they are duty bound to arrest the suspect. Likewise, we Americans are duty bound by our allegiance to the US Constitution to end the detaining of the prisoners at Gitmo and investigate those who detained them. No one should be above the law!
JAISALMER: A 13-year-old girl is revolting against a hoary tradition that has crushed many a childhood in Rajasthan – child marriage.
Refusing to crumble under social pressure, Asu Kunwar from Sedhana village, near Pokhran, stood up to her father who was bent on marrying her off to a 40-year-old for Rs 49,000 and a gold chain.
Bhom Singh now has to return the money to his prospective son-in-law in the face of resistance from Asu, who sought police protection.
Bhom Singh struck the deal with Sawai Singh two years ago, promising to give him his daughter’s hand when she was older. He was forced to send back his prospective son-in-law after Asu put her foot down.
Soon she had won her mother over to her side, but the father, who had already taken the bride price of Rs 49,000 tried to push her into wedlock this April, saying a date had already been fixed and a Rajput had to honour his word.
Confronted by the empowered mother-daughter duo, Sawai Singh, meanwhile, reached out to the larger male-dominated community and village panchayat of Sedhana. He also went to the local police to seek their help, but they refused to intervene.
Petitioned by Sawai Singh, the village panchayat met and decided it was only fair that the man be allowed to marry the 13-year-old. Villagers then gathered around the girl’s house and tried to force her to agree to the wedding.
Seeing the community against her, Asu’s mother went to Indu Chopra, a woman official of the local women and child development department.
That’s when the official organised protection for the mother and child and warned the villagers to back off. A police force, which had till then stood as mute spectators, was then forced to step in and caution Asu’s father about the consequences of violating the ban on child marriage.
Bhom Singh, villagers said, has now borrowed money from various sources to pay back the bride price.
It’s illegal to sell babies in most parts of the world and for women to have sex for money (prostitution). Why is it acceptable in ANY society, tradition bound or not, to take money from an older man and then force your daughter to marry that man when she is still a child?! That father should be locked up, along with the prospective groom, and the girl and her mother should be honored as heros for human rights.
And I thought the Ku Klux Klan was hateful! This blog actually makes the Klan look respectable! And maybe that’s the actual point.
No one deserves “ghetto bragging rights”, whatever that means. The very idea is ridiculous. As human beings, we need to do all we can to lift each other up, not tear each other down. Indeed, I seriously doubt that blog was made by a person of African descent. It looks instead like the sort of thing a white racist would make to depict black people in the worst possible light. How sad.
The saying “Spare the rod and spoil the child” is a tragic misunderstanding of a passage of the Book of Proverbs (Proverbs 13:24). The rod referred to that used by shepherds in ancient times to guide sheep to go in a certain direction, but NOT to ever BEAT them! Beating children with anything should be considered abuse, because adults are stronger than children. Therefore, the only thing kids can learn from being beaten is that bullying is acceptable and thus they can get ahead by bulling weaker and smaller people!
In June of 2007, I learned that a Care2 member had died violently. I was shocked at this news, and wondered if the member’s Care2 profile was to be removed as a result of his death. I asked a question to that effect in Care2 Feedback and Suggestions, and then another member sent me a message calling me a “heartless SOB”. I was amazed at this vulgar language, and sent a reply back to this member stating that “your sarcasm is not appropriate at this time.” I NEVER would have called for the dead member’s profile to be removed, and was disturbed that anyone would even think that of me.
It seems to me that if people already hate me, then anything I might do, however innocent, will be twisted by the haters in the worst possible way simply for the sake of bashing me, and that any attempt I make to defend myself against the haters causes them and those who wrongfully sympathize with the haters to attack me more! To me, this sort of attitude is the same as racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, or any other form of bigotry. It is unethical and should be tempered by reason and tolerance. I’ve just about had it with trying to figure people out and why they make other people targets. If I had defamed the dead person in some way, I’d understand the slamming I got over him. But I firmly beleive that I was lied about by another member and I have no tolerance for that. And my proving that I was lied about should have given the supporters of that other person pause about the position they took, but instead they attacked me again for DEFENDING MYSELF! What they are really saying, in essence, is “Hey, Dale, do the rest of us a favor, and SHUT UP even if we slander you all over the place!” You might as well murder me, then. I don’t lie about anyone, period, and no one can prove otherwise!
As much as I enjoy debates in the internet, I have noticed that certain people tend to engage in tactics that cause the debates to degenerate into slugfests instead of allowing them to end on a civil note. Here are some examples of what they do:
Lie constantly. It does not matter if what you say has no basis in fact whatsoever. As long as you can make a counter to any statement of fact or logical argument that someone makes, you will appear to be on an equal level with your opponent.
Never bother to provide a basis for your assertions by linking to a credible source of information or providing a reference regarding a matter that is not common knowledge. Of course, if you are already doing No. 1, then No. 2 comes naturally.
Engage in the practice of what I call “parroting and nitpicking” constantly: Making an exact copy of your opponent’s arguments and answering them point by point exactly instead of stating a new point of your own to move the debate forward. This has two effects: It makes you appear equal to your opponent, no matter how dumb your statements turn out to be, and it encourages your opponent to respond to you in the same way, taking the debate into an endless circle.
When you are accused of lying, just call your opponent a liar as well.
Engage in frequent sarcastic insults to annoy your opponent.
When your opponent complains that your tactics are unfair or dishonorable, accuse him of not really wanting a debate.
If you know your opponent has a short temper, wait until his patience has run out and he has gotten angry and then take advantage of the situation to torture your opponent still more!
Never admit you are wrong about anything. Always accuse your opponents of not thinking or of being stupid, brainwashed, ignorant, mindless, etc.
Use religion as a excuse to justify your extreme position. If your opponent is not of the same religion, use that fact against him.
Keep the debate going as long as possible until your opponent gives up in frustration, allowing you to claim “victory” later.
Last. but not least, CREATE NEW PROFILES TO INFILTRATE AND THEN DISRUPT GROUPS YOU WERE PREVIOUSLY BLOCKED FROM, THUS VIOLATING THE GROUP OWNER’S PROPERTY RIGHTS!
If you use these tactics repeatedly, you may appear very successful in debates. But you will also gain the contempt of most people who have a sense of honor and ethics. And that contempt for you personally may also lead to a rejection of your position as well, even if the position has some truth in it.