Guy needs whack upside the head with a nominally sized 2x4.
|
|
|
Harvard prof fights for $4 on takeout!
- Thread starter rashidme
- Start date
Guy needs whack upside the head with a nominally sized 2x4.
3 5/8" x 1 5/8". I use 3 5/8" steel studs and track every day at work because it's meant to mimic a 2x4's planed size.
This post prompted me to check actual size. First old cut off scrap 2x4 I measured was 1 1/2" x 3 3/8". That seemed odd so measured brand new 2x4 recently purchased: 1 1/2" x 3 1/2". Also measured 2x3: 1 3/8" x 2 3/8".
Doesn't a 2x4 fit inside a steel stud? I believe we used to do that for door frames on interior light commercial doors. Wouldn't that make them 1 1/2 x 3 1/2 then? I hope not, though. Cause that would mean Inreb was right about something in 2014.
Didn't read the op, but if I don't get what I paid for, or believed I was getting, I raise a stink. I don't care if it's $1. They do that to everyone, and it adds up. Remember the guy in the bank that stole millions by transferring out pennies from peoples accounts? It really added up for him.
I may have veered left of the topic. Sorry.
Joe Bass, out.
Not sure what the problem is, except fort the knee-jerk reaction against academics who are, of course, elitist.
But the restaurant, it was going to update their online prices eventually, right? Sure it was. But somehow they're the ones you believe.
Of course they owed the guy $4, but he's not putting up a fight for the other $8 for his own sake. Duh. There's an ulterior motive. Maybe, oh, I dunno, to make sure they fix the problem and stop screwing people?
But no, he's an elitist, he'd sell his mom for a buck...
This place is so twisted it's laughable, and I can't resist pointing out the idiocy of some people when it pops up in threads like this. It's just so easy.
But the restaurant, it was going to update their online prices eventually, right? Sure it was. But somehow they're the ones you believe.
Of course they owed the guy $4, but he's not putting up a fight for the other $8 for his own sake. Duh. There's an ulterior motive. Maybe, oh, I dunno, to make sure they fix the problem and stop screwing people?
But no, he's an elitist, he'd sell his mom for a buck...
This place is so twisted it's laughable, and I can't resist pointing out the idiocy of some people when it pops up in threads like this. It's just so easy.
It was a zero sum situation. I was doing laundry shortly anyway so getting the socks wet was not much concern but bending over to put the boots on would have been a minor bother. You gotta be able to make these quick decisions on the fly if you want to make it around here.
He's actually apologized now. I don't think that he should have.
Riceburner
Well-known member
I don't think he should have either. I once had a restaurant give me a menu with prices then charge me more than what's on the menu. They changed their prices on their blackboard by the register but didn't make new menus. I paid the menu price.
We're building an ark
Riceburner
Well-known member
Lol.......
CanadianBiker
Well-known member
You got that right.
Again, he awarded himself the additional $8.00. He wasn't entitled to it, it's just a benchmark of what courts typically award successful plaintiffs (according to him). Each case is unique, of course, but I have my doubts that a judge would have awarded him 3X "damages" when the resaurant had immediately made a reasonable offer as soon as it was brought to their attention.
I can't speak for anyone else here but I don't consider the lawyer an 'elitist'. He's just a guy. My opinion of him would be the same if he was the janitor at Harvard, though I imagine HIS opinion of himself is quite different. I've met enough lawyers and professors to make that bet.
You want to assign altruistic motivations to this guy, in effect "he's doing for the people, the little guy, righting a terrible wrong. Unless you know this man personally and are privy to the workings of his mind, I don't buy it. Again, lawyers, professors, etc.
Plus he only apologized once his story was all over the internet and he was made to look like a self-righteous jackass.
In the end, it's an amusing story about a blowhard who got owned, after spending an inordinate amount of time trumpeting his cause. Looks good on him.
Basically, he should have accepted their offer of paying the lower price and asked them to fix it.
If they said two weeks, then he can go back then and raise the stink that he did.
But at least give people the benefit of the doubt.
The article I read made it sound like he'd done his research beforehand, and was just trolling for trouble.
If they said two weeks, then he can go back then and raise the stink that he did.
But at least give people the benefit of the doubt.
The article I read made it sound like he'd done his research beforehand, and was just trolling for trouble.
A manager acknowledged the website prices were out of date and promised to fix them "soon". No wonder the poor guy saw red, first he's overcharged then he's blown off with "ya, we'll get right on that"
I wonder how the restaurant would feel if everybody under paid that amount? Ah, so solly! Rook for cheque in mail.
I wonder how the restaurant would feel if everybody under paid that amount? Ah, so solly! Rook for cheque in mail.
Last edited:
|
|
|
|
|