|
Home > Archive > microsoft.public.cert.exams.mcse > August 2002 > OT follow up to bats ugly brit post
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
OT follow up to bats ugly brit post
|
|
| Consultant® 2002-08-13, 1:23 pm |
| not only are they ugly, they are a$$ stupid
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2...9113928770.html
--
Consultant® MCNGP #2
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
You assume all risk for your use. © 2002 Consultant Corporation. All rights
reserved. Not responsible for bad pictures.
| |
|
|
| Who Am I 2002-08-14, 3:23 am |
| LMAO....yes that does show the XXX stupid the UK can be. Wasnt it the Yanks
who bought London Bridge thinking they had bought Tower Bridge??? (DOH)
Wasnt it a Yank woman who put a dog in the microwave to dry and succeeded in
sueing the microwave manufacturer because it didnt have do not put animals
in microwave warning in the manual or box (DOH)
Need i go on!!!!!
"Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
news:eEsPM2vQCHA.1632@tkmsftngp11...
> > http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2...9113928770.html
> >
>
> Silly teenagers.
>
>
>
> *weeps for the future*
>
>
| |
|
| circa Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:38:52 +0100, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Who Am I (whoami@godknowswhere.com)
said,
> LMAO....yes that does show the XXX stupid the UK can be. Wasnt it the Yanks
> who bought London Bridge thinking they had bought Tower Bridge??? (DOH)
> Wasnt it a Yank woman who put a dog in the microwave to dry and succeeded in
> sueing the microwave manufacturer because it didnt have do not put animals
> in microwave warning in the manual or box (DOH)
>
> Need i go on!!!!!
>
What, making things up? Nah.
| |
| Who Am I 2002-08-14, 6:23 am |
| They are true stories dude.....just you find it hard to accept :P
"Ijit" <youare@an.idiot> wrote in message
news:MPG.17c4040fb577f5098a087@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:38:52 +0100, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Who Am I (whoami@godknowswhere.com)
> said,
> > LMAO....yes that does show the XXX stupid the UK can be. Wasnt it the
Yanks
> > who bought London Bridge thinking they had bought Tower Bridge??? (DOH)
> > Wasnt it a Yank woman who put a dog in the microwave to dry and
succeeded in
> > sueing the microwave manufacturer because it didnt have do not put
animals
> > in microwave warning in the manual or box (DOH)
> >
> > Need i go on!!!!!
> >
> What, making things up? Nah.
| |
|
|
| Who Am I 2002-08-14, 7:23 am |
| Visit Here and do a search for London 
http://www.crackthesky.com/bb_archi...2_02-07-02.html
here are some good ones
http://www.thecatflap.co.uk/pages/s...ople/septic.php
Do I even have to mention Al Gore :P
http://www.freemypeople.com/Rants/stupid.htm
"Who Am I" <whoami@godknowswhere.com> wrote in message
news:ajdgoa$1ae1vm$1@ID-155699.news.dfncis.de...
> They are true stories dude.....just you find it hard to accept :P
>
> "Ijit" <youare@an.idiot> wrote in message
> news:MPG.17c4040fb577f5098a087@msnews.microsoft.com...
> > circa Wed, 14 Aug 2002 09:38:52 +0100, in
> > microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Who Am I (whoami@godknowswhere.com)
> > said,
> > > LMAO....yes that does show the XXX stupid the UK can be. Wasnt it the
> Yanks
> > > who bought London Bridge thinking they had bought Tower Bridge???
(DOH)
> > > Wasnt it a Yank woman who put a dog in the microwave to dry and
> succeeded in
> > > sueing the microwave manufacturer because it didnt have do not put
> animals
> > > in microwave warning in the manual or box (DOH)
> > >
> > > Need i go on!!!!!
> > >
> > What, making things up? Nah.
>
>
| |
| SWalters 2002-08-14, 8:23 am |
| "Who Am I" <whoami@godknowswhere.com> wrote in
news:ajd4t7$1a2pvm$1@ID-155699.news.dfncis.de:
> LMAO....yes that does show the XXX stupid the UK can be. Wasnt it the
> Yanks who bought London Bridge thinking they had bought Tower
> Bridge??? (DOH) Wasnt it a Yank woman who put a dog in the microwave
> to dry and succeeded in sueing the microwave manufacturer because it
> didnt have do not put animals in microwave warning in the manual or
> box (DOH)
>
> Need i go on!!!!!
>
lol these are funny as shit but how ridiculous can you be, using this as
deragotory remarks against US peeps. There are outrageous things happening
everyday from all countries around the world. I read reports about shit
that comes from European Countries that is also unreal.....some Asian and
"Allah" countries even worse.
Also, your links are from sites that look like the little kid on the block
wrote the HTML so they do not hold much in the way of realism. I'm als not
saying they didn't happen but it would be nice to see them on a different
site.
--
-=SW=-
- MCP
| |
| Who Am I 2002-08-14, 8:23 am |
| True I agree that the sites do suck.....
What the news with regards to Al Gore....Sure it wont be long before he
cocks up again.
Also watch Jerry Springer.
At the end of the day we are all human and the minority are really stupid,
just hate it when someone picks a particular country ie UK and states we are
all stupid :P
"SWalters" <swalters_1NOSPAM@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns926A60FCF7541noIDtoken
@63.209.170.232...
> "Who Am I" <whoami@godknowswhere.com> wrote in
> news:ajd4t7$1a2pvm$1@ID-155699.news.dfncis.de:
>
> > LMAO....yes that does show the XXX stupid the UK can be. Wasnt it the
> > Yanks who bought London Bridge thinking they had bought Tower
> > Bridge??? (DOH) Wasnt it a Yank woman who put a dog in the microwave
> > to dry and succeeded in sueing the microwave manufacturer because it
> > didnt have do not put animals in microwave warning in the manual or
> > box (DOH)
> >
> > Need i go on!!!!!
> >
>
> lol these are funny as shit but how ridiculous can you be, using this as
> deragotory remarks against US peeps. There are outrageous things happening
> everyday from all countries around the world. I read reports about shit
> that comes from European Countries that is also unreal.....some Asian and
> "Allah" countries even worse.
>
> Also, your links are from sites that look like the little kid on the block
> wrote the HTML so they do not hold much in the way of realism. I'm als not
> saying they didn't happen but it would be nice to see them on a different
> site.
>
> --
> -=SW=-
> - MCP
| |
| Steven 2002-08-14, 8:23 am |
| > Also, your links are from sites that look like the little kid on the block
> wrote the HTML so they do not hold much in the way of realism. I'm als not
> saying they didn't happen but it would be nice to see them on a different
> site.
Yep, was a pretty crap page I admit.
Do a google search for "Stella awards".
Named after Stella Liebeck who sued McD's after the infamous hot coffee
incident.
It's not aimed as a swipe against the US, it's just carrying on from the
headcases in the attic who couldn't get out...methinks the beer had
something to do with it.
| |
|
| > They are true stories dude.....just you find it hard to accept :P
>
That doesn't mean they are stupid. It means they know how to work the
system. They are scumbags and should DIE but it doesn't mean they are
stupid.
Sometimes I pray for Communism just so they'll kill all the lawyers.
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-08-14, 9:23 am |
| "Steven" <Steven@no-spam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:52s69.2577$Ts6.47382771@news-text.cableinet.net... [colo
r=darkred]
> > > > Need i go on!!!!!
> > > >
> > > What, making things up? Nah.
>
> http://www.geeksontheweb.com/Forwar...tellaawards.htm[/color]
ALL of the "Stella" awards are bogus, urban myths.
--
Fris "Do NOT get me started on the Stella case, you won't like me when I'm
angry" bee® MCNGP #13
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-08-14, 9:23 am |
| "Steven" <Steven@no-spam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Kat69.2684$EF6.47847550@news-text.cableinet.net...
> > Also, your links are from sites that look like the little kid on the
block
> > wrote the HTML so they do not hold much in the way of realism. I'm als
not
> > saying they didn't happen but it would be nice to see them on a
different
> > site.
>
> Yep, was a pretty crap page I admit.
>
> Do a google search for "Stella awards".
>
> Named after Stella Liebeck who sued McD's after the infamous hot coffee
> incident.
I warned you...
http://thespleen.com/thelaw/whoscre...x.php?artID=223
http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm
http://friends.macjournals.com/matt...ies/storyReader$254
http://www.consumerrights.net/mcdonalds.html
Read at least some of those, then tell me it was a frivolous lawsuit. I
know you never stated such, but I get in a rile every time some infers it.
--
Fris "Stella rules" bee® MCNGP #13
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
|
| > Read at least some of those, then tell me it was a frivolous lawsuit. I
> know you never stated such, but I get in a rile every time some infers it.
>
She still spilled it on herself. I don't care if the coffee was too hot.
(I don't think there is such a thing). If you went to a friends house and
spilled a really hot cup of coffee on yourself, would you sue your friend?
I doubt it. So why would you sue McDs? Cause you can. Never make anyone
pay for YOUR mistakes.
Personal responsiblity is a term that has lost all meaning on Americans I'm
afraid.
| |
| Don Julio 2002-08-14, 10:23 am |
| ..
>
> At the end of the day we are all human and the minority are really stupid,
> just hate it when someone picks a particular country ie UK and states we
are
> all stupid :P
Personally I think it's good to be able to laugh at ourselves
PS I'm a Brit, and I can vouch we are all stupid....every last one of
us.......wibble!
--
Don Julio MCNGP #11
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
|
| circa Wed, 14 Aug 2002 13:00:58 +0100, in
microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Who Am I (whoami@godknowswhere.com)
said,
> They are true stories dude.....just you find it hard to accept :P
>
Wrong.
http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.htm
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-08-14, 10:23 am |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
news:eA6DpY6QCHA.4040@tkmsftngp09...
> > Read at least some of those, then tell me it was a frivolous lawsuit. I
> > know you never stated such, but I get in a rile every time some infers
it.
> >
>
> She still spilled it on herself. I don't care if the coffee was too hot.
> (I don't think there is such a thing).
I guess you didn't read it... Coffee is -usually- served at restaurants at
around 135-145 degrees (f). Mickey D's had their coffee at around 175-185
degrees (f). At that temperature, third-degree burns set-in after three to
seven seconds of contact.
> If you went to a friends house and
> spilled a really hot cup of coffee on yourself, would you sue your friend?
Yes, if it was that hot, and I was not warned.
> I doubt it. So why would you sue McDs? Cause you can. Never make anyone
> pay for YOUR mistakes.
Stella did nothing wrong. She was judged to be "20 percent" at fault,
however. Contrary to popular belief, neither was the car moving, nor was
she driving. Her grandson pulled over after the drive-through and stopped
so his grandmother could take the lid off and add cream and sugar. The
flimsy cup spilled causing her severe injuries, she was in her eighties.
Burning is especially bad for the very young and the very old. $20,000 in
medical bills and about eight days in a hospital. All she wanted was her
medical bills, this was not someone looking for a gold mine. McDonald's was
aware of the dangers, and was grossly negligent because even though there
were quite a few other similar incidences, it was cheaper to settle out of
court for the others than get better cups, or take other measures. They
just didn't want to settle with Stella. Mickey D's made (at that time) $1.3
million per day in coffee sales... they could afford to settle the dozens of
cases they had rather than change.
> Personal responsiblity is a term that has lost all meaning on Americans
I'm
> afraid.
And if this happened to your child, would you feel the same? No, children
generally don't get coffee, but I was in a Mickey D's just the other day
when I saw TWO cups of coffee get knocked over from a ledge, not at the same
time, but two separate occurrences. If a child was nearby, he/she could
have been severely scalded, had Mickey D's not finally lowered their
temperatures to a more reasonable level.
--
Fris "Yes, there ARE frivolous lawsuits... this just wasn't one of them"
bee® MCNGP #13
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
| Who Am I 2002-08-14, 10:23 am |
| Hey I am a Brit and I am not stupid...totally insane yes but not
stupid....well not by my standards....which is pretty low.....back to the
padded cell...
"Don Julio" <me@work.com> wrote in message
news:esm0Cb6QCHA.1996@tkmsftngp12...
> .
> >
> > At the end of the day we are all human and the minority are really
stupid,
> > just hate it when someone picks a particular country ie UK and states we
> are
> > all stupid :P
>
> Personally I think it's good to be able to laugh at ourselves
>
> PS I'm a Brit, and I can vouch we are all stupid....every last one of
> us.......wibble!
>
> --
> Don Julio MCNGP #11
>
> http://www.mcngp.tk
> The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
>
>
| |
| Who Am I 2002-08-14, 10:23 am |
| Whatever....you can always find a site that says so and so site is wrong....
Did man actually land on the moon?
And was it 2 jets that smashed into the WTC?
Are just two famous examples.
Anyway, we are OT so we are all stupid except me cause I am insane.
"Ijit" <youare@an.idiot> wrote in message
news:MPG.17c4423a6fb258a698a089@msnews.microsoft.com...
> circa Wed, 14 Aug 2002 13:00:58 +0100, in
> microsoft.public.cert.exam.mcse, Who Am I (whoami@godknowswhere.com)
> said,
> > They are true stories dude.....just you find it hard to accept :P
> >
>
> Wrong.
> http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.htm
| |
|
| > I guess you didn't read it... Coffee is -usually- served at restaurants
at
> around 135-145 degrees (f). Mickey D's had their coffee at around 175-185
> degrees (f). At that temperature, third-degree burns set-in after three
to
> seven seconds of contact.
I did read it. You didn't read my response. "I don't care if it was too
hot."
> Yes, if it was that hot, and I was not warned.
First, I'm never inviting you over for coffee and second, wouldn't you
expect the coffee to be hot?
> Stella did nothing wrong. She was judged to be "20 percent" at fault,
She spilled the coffee on herself. Had she not, this would not be an issue
would it? So therefore she's responsible. Did a McDonalds employee come
running out and dump it into her lap? If she poored it on her own head
purposely, could she have sued then?
> however. Contrary to popular belief, neither was the car moving, nor was
> she driving. Her grandson pulled over after the drive-through and stopped
> so his grandmother could take the lid off and add cream and sugar. The
> flimsy cup spilled causing her severe injuries, she was in her eighties.
> Burning is especially bad for the very young and the very old. $20,000 in
> medical bills and about eight days in a hospital. All she wanted was her
> medical bills, this was not someone looking for a gold mine. McDonald's
was
> aware of the dangers, and was grossly negligent because even though there
> were quite a few other similar incidences, it was cheaper to settle out of
> court for the others than get better cups, or take other measures. They
> just didn't want to settle with Stella. Mickey D's made (at that time)
$1.3
> million per day in coffee sales... they could afford to settle the dozens
of
> cases they had rather than change.
It's not a matter of if they can afford it. Its the friggin prinicple of
the thing.
> And if this happened to your child, would you feel the same?
Yes. I watch my children. In essence, I take responsibility for their
care. I know that's an odd concept in this country but I'm silly that way.
> No, children
> generally don't get coffee, but I was in a Mickey D's just the other day
> when I saw TWO cups of coffee get knocked over from a ledge, not at the
same
> time, but two separate occurrences. If a child was nearby, he/she could
> have been severely scalded, had Mickey D's not finally lowered their
> temperatures to a more reasonable level.
What if my kids burn their hands on the hot fajita plates from Chevy's?
(Mexican Resturant) Should I sue Chevy's? Should they stop serving me hot
food?
Bottom line: She spilled it on herself.
| |
| diamondÐan 2002-08-14, 11:23 am |
| In article <ek64Ux6QCHA.2696@tkmsftngp13>, Jtyc decided to open his
mouth and remove all doubt by saying...
> > I guess you didn't read it... Coffee is -usually- served at restaurants
> at
> > around 135-145 degrees (f). Mickey D's had their coffee at around 175-185
> > degrees (f). At that temperature, third-degree burns set-in after three
> to
> > seven seconds of contact.
>
> I did read it. You didn't read my response. "I don't care if it was too
> hot."
There has to be a point where "too hot" is too hot! McD's doesn't serve
their coffee in ceramic mugs, but in plastic or paper disposable cups.
These cups have temperature limitations and are designed to perform to
specs within a given temperature range. If you exceed that range of
temperatures, expect the cup to lose its structural stability and become
"flimsy" and more prone to spilling or total containment failure.
Don't get me wrong, I am VERY opposed to frivolous lawsuits in which the
plaintiffs blame others for their own negligence. But, I do believe that
someone else's negligence (in this case McD's excessive coffee temps)
should have consequences if it substantially increases the risk of
injury or harm to myself (even if I am %20 negligent). The
responsibility bit goes both ways, and corporations are just as guilty
of passing the buck of responsibility to others as common individuals
are (after all, it is these same common individuals that are running the
companies and making these decisions).
> First, I'm never inviting you over for coffee and second, wouldn't you
> expect the coffee to be hot?
Please, I don't smell and I wipe my feet thoroughly before entering a
room. ;-)
> > Stella did nothing wrong. She was judged to be "20 percent" at fault,
>
> She spilled the coffee on herself. Had she not, this would not be an issue
> would it? So therefore she's responsible. Did a McDonalds employee come
> running out and dump it into her lap? If she poored it on her own head
> purposely, could she have sued then?
True, but as stated, her responsibility was not 100%. If the coffee was
not too hot and the cup compromised, the spillage of the coffee would
have not had the dire consequences that it did.
--
diamondDan - MCNGP #9 #9 #9 #9 #9 #9
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-08-14, 11:23 am |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
news:ek64Ux6QCHA.2696@tkmsftngp13...
> > I guess you didn't read it... Coffee is -usually- served at restaurants
> at
> > around 135-145 degrees (f). Mickey D's had their coffee at around
175-185
> > degrees (f). At that temperature, third-degree burns set-in after three
> to
> > seven seconds of contact.
>
> I did read it. You didn't read my response. "I don't care if it was
too
> hot."
It's even too hot to drink at 180 degrees! You said can it be too hot, and
yes, it can. At 180 degrees, you'll even scald your mouth. People have
argued that MD did this because people at the drive-thru wanted their coffee
to be hot when they got to their office to drink it, but MD's OWN research
showed that the vast majority of drive-thru traffic wanted to drink their
coffee right away. Please... brew yourself some coffee, you might have to
microwave it to make it hotter. Most home coffee machines do not approach
that temperature. Then take a swig. Let me know how pleasurable it is.
> > Yes, if it was that hot, and I was not warned.
>
> First, I'm never inviting you over for coffee and second, wouldn't you
> expect the coffee to be hot?
Yes, but not to the degree that would cause me third-degree burns. No,
thanks... got any ice cubes?
> > Stella did nothing wrong. She was judged to be "20 percent" at fault,
>
> She spilled the coffee on herself. Had she not, this would not be an
issue
> would it? So therefore she's responsible. Did a McDonalds employee come
> running out and dump it into her lap? If she poored it on her own head
> purposely, could she have sued then?
She removed the lid from the top. There was no place in her vehicle to
place the coffee to do this, yeah yeah I know, not MD's fault for that part
either, but she did not do anything that anyone else would not do. The cups
are quite flimsy. Had the water not been at a temperature that MD's own
people KNEW was too hot, it would not be an issue either.
> > however. Contrary to popular belief, neither was the car moving, nor
was
> > she driving. Her grandson pulled over after the drive-through and
stopped
> > so his grandmother could take the lid off and add cream and sugar. The
> > flimsy cup spilled causing her severe injuries, she was in her eighties.
> > Burning is especially bad for the very young and the very old. $20,000
in
> > medical bills and about eight days in a hospital. All she wanted was
her
> > medical bills, this was not someone looking for a gold mine. McDonald's
> was
> > aware of the dangers, and was grossly negligent because even though
there
> > were quite a few other similar incidences, it was cheaper to settle out
of
> > court for the others than get better cups, or take other measures. They
> > just didn't want to settle with Stella. Mickey D's made (at that time)
> $1.3
> > million per day in coffee sales... they could afford to settle the
dozens
> of
> > cases they had rather than change.
>
> It's not a matter of if they can afford it. Its the friggin prinicple of
> the thing.
Thank you for illustrating my point. MD's motivation is profit, pure and
simple, which in itself is fine, but not at the cost of a dangerous threat.
Do you not get this? It would have cost them more money to make the product
considerably safer than to simply let people injure themselves and then just
pay those people. There's a point where safety should come ahead of profit.
What am I saying? I'm arguing this with the person who thinks that
unemployment compensation is a hand-out.
> > And if this happened to your child, would you feel the same?
>
> Yes. I watch my children. In essence, I take responsibility for their
> care. I know that's an odd concept in this country but I'm silly that
way.
You sound a lot like a person I argued with (equally pointless) in
alt.misc.kids who stated that he didn't need no derned car seats for his
kids... when he was a kid, his dad's arm did fine keeping him from flying
through a window should there be a car crash. After all, he's a good
driver, too. Shit happens that parents can't always control. So if MD
wants to serve coffee at near boiling point for profit purposes, it's okay
if some of that spills on my family. By the way, the reason that this
makes better profit for MD is because the coffee "keeps" longer at higher
temperatures. There's no other advantage that I'm aware of.
> > No, children
> > generally don't get coffee, but I was in a Mickey D's just the other day
> > when I saw TWO cups of coffee get knocked over from a ledge, not at the
> same
> > time, but two separate occurrences. If a child was nearby, he/she could
> > have been severely scalded, had Mickey D's not finally lowered their
> > temperatures to a more reasonable level.
>
> What if my kids burn their hands on the hot fajita plates from Chevy's?
> (Mexican Resturant) Should I sue Chevy's? Should they stop serving me
hot
> food?
If you need a very hot plate to produce some fajitas, then you need it. You
don't NEED to have coffee at 185 degrees. Go ahead, slurp down that hot
coffee.
> Bottom line: She spilled it on herself.
Okay, you win. Let's start serving coffee at 211 degrees now.
--
Fris "In Death Valley, you might could serve it at around 215 degrees" bee®
MCNGP #13
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
|
| > There has to be a point where "too hot" is too hot! McD's doesn't serve
> their coffee in ceramic mugs, but in plastic or paper disposable cups.
> These cups have temperature limitations and are designed to perform to
> specs within a given temperature range. If you exceed that range of
> temperatures, expect the cup to lose its structural stability and become
> "flimsy" and more prone to spilling or total containment failure.
Then wouldn't it be the cup manufacturers responsibility? There many more
customers who have not had a problem. So does that mean the the cups
structural integrity failed in this one case? They were serving it that hot
to everyone. Not just her. You'd think that if the heat of the coffee
exceeded the manufacturer's specifications for what Styrofoam can handle
that there would be many more cases of cups collapsing on people.
> True, but as stated, her responsibility was not 100%. If the coffee was
> not too hot and the cup compromised, the spillage of the coffee would
> have not had the dire consequences that it did.
>
Again, that makes it sound like the cup manufacturer's fault since the vast
majority of cups did not become "compromised". I find that hard to believe
and I think people are trying to justify this fact:
She spilled it on herself.
| |
|
| > It's even too hot to drink at 180 degrees! You said can it be too hot,
and
> yes, it can. At 180 degrees, you'll even scald your mouth. People have
> argued that MD did this because people at the drive-thru wanted their
coffee
> to be hot when they got to their office to drink it, but MD's OWN research
> showed that the vast majority of drive-thru traffic wanted to drink their
> coffee right away. Please... brew yourself some coffee, you might have to
> microwave it to make it hotter. Most home coffee machines do not approach
> that temperature. Then take a swig. Let me know how pleasurable it is.
I have had really hot coffee before. And yes I have had it so hot that it
burned my mouth. Solution, I wait for it to cool. Do you really, honestly,
believe that McDs made their coffee that hot just to hurt people? Don't you
think they considered something when they decided to brew it that hot? Why
else would they brew it at that temperate at all their stores?
Those dicks, how dare they try and satisfy some of their customers...
> She removed the lid from the top. There was no place in her vehicle to
> place the coffee to do this, yeah yeah I know, not MD's fault for that
part
> either, but she did not do anything that anyone else would not do.
So, she takes the lid of in a vehicle that moves. This vehicle is subject
to Newtonian law as is everything in it, she knows she has a hot cup of
coffee....
she takes the lid off....
At what point did McDonalds come into this picture and dump the coffee on
her lap? Are you saying the cup itself fell apart? Did the bottom fall out
of the cup?
If the cup collaped structurally then you have a case in my opinion. But
did that happen?
> are quite flimsy. Had the water not been at a temperature that MD's own
> people KNEW was too hot, it would not be an issue either.
>
> > > however. Contrary to popular belief, neither was the car moving, nor
> was
> > > she driving. Her grandson pulled over after the drive-through and
> stopped
> > > so his grandmother could take the lid off and add cream and sugar.
The[c
olor=darkred]
> > > flimsy cup spilled[/color]
How? Give me details. Did a hole appear?
> Thank you for illustrating my point. MD's motivation is profit, pure and
> simple, which in itself is fine, but not at the cost of a dangerous
threat.
> Do you not get this?
I understand the profit model of business yes. How do you not get this:
She spilled it on herself.
>It would have cost them more money to make the product
> considerably safer than to simply let people injure themselves and then
just
> pay those people. There's a point where safety should come ahead of
profit.
> What am I saying? I'm arguing this with the person who thinks that
> unemployment compensation is a hand-out.
Unemployment is not pertinent to this discussion but, I would rather not pay
for it and take care of myself yes.
>
> You sound a lot like a person I argued with (equally pointless) in
> alt.misc.kids who stated that he didn't need no derned car seats for his
> kids... when he was a kid, his dad's arm did fine keeping him from flying
> through a window should there be a car crash. After all, he's a good
> driver, too. Shit happens that parents can't always control. So if MD
Again, not pertinent to the discussion but:
If he doesn't use car seats for his kids he's an idiot. But I question the
need for the government to spend time and resources to force parents to use
car seats. I use them because I have common sense.
> wants to serve coffee at near boiling point for profit purposes, it's okay
> if some of that spills on my family. By the way, the reason that this
> makes better profit for MD is because the coffee "keeps" longer at higher
> temperatures. There's no other advantage that I'm aware of.
So, Chevy's serves their fajitas on a hot plate so it comes to you freshly
cooked. They don't warn you that it's still cooking. If you put a piece
of that steak in your mouth, you WILL burn yourself. I don't think anyone
has sued Chevy's to date. Why not?
> If you need a very hot plate to produce some fajitas, then you need it.
You
> don't NEED to have coffee at 185 degrees. Go ahead, slurp down that hot
> coffee.
I'd rather have it hot than cold. Have you had coffee that's gotten
cold..... ugh...
> Okay, you win. Let's start serving coffee at 211 degrees now.
I don't believe I ever made the argument that they should increase the
temperature of the coffee. Where do you see that I said that?
But I haven't seen evidence to contridict this:
She spilled it on herself.
| |
| Frisbee®, MCNGP 2002-08-14, 12:23 pm |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
news:eLgise7QCHA.4012@tkmsftngp11...
> > It's even too hot to drink at 180 degrees! You said can it be too hot,
> and
> > yes, it can. At 180 degrees, you'll even scald your mouth. People have
> > argued that MD did this because people at the drive-thru wanted their
> coffee
> > to be hot when they got to their office to drink it, but MD's OWN
research
> > showed that the vast majority of drive-thru traffic wanted to drink
their
> > coffee right away. Please... brew yourself some coffee, you might have
to
> > microwave it to make it hotter. Most home coffee machines do not
approach
> > that temperature. Then take a swig. Let me know how pleasurable it is.
>
> I have had really hot coffee before. And yes I have had it so hot that it
> burned my mouth. Solution, I wait for it to cool. Do you really,
honestly,
> believe that McDs made their coffee that hot just to hurt people? Don't
you
> think they considered something when they decided to brew it that hot?
Why
> else would they brew it at that temperate at all their stores?
Why would anyone want it that hot? Also, you might wait for it to cool. I
add cream and/or ice cubes to make it cool faster. After all, I want a cup
of coffee now, not a half hour from now. Do they make it hot to hurt
people? No, they do it to make more money. Did they consider things when
they decided to make it that hot? Records say yes, from what I read. They
were warned about the dangers, and ignored it.
> Those dicks, how dare they try and satisfy some of their customers...
How is this satisfying some of their customers? You want coffee that's too
hot to drink? What, to look at?
> > She removed the lid from the top. There was no place in her vehicle to
> > place the coffee to do this, yeah yeah I know, not MD's fault for that
> part
> > either, but she did not do anything that anyone else would not do.
>
> So, she takes the lid of in a vehicle that moves. This vehicle is subject
> to Newtonian law as is everything in it, she knows she has a hot cup of
> coffee....
When was it ever stated that the vehicle was moving?
> she takes the lid off....
>
> At what point did McDonalds come into this picture and dump the coffee on
> her lap? Are you saying the cup itself fell apart? Did the bottom fall
out
> of the cup?
>
> If the cup collaped structurally then you have a case in my opinion. But
> did that happen?
I don't know that particular detail, I don't think it's mentioned -in
detail- anywhere that I've read. I realize that this is your sticking
point. Perhaps this was the case, perhaps that's why she won. I don't
know. Have you ever tried removing a lid from one of those things? You
don't have to be moving, just hold it with one hand, and attempt to remove
the lid with the other. If it's full, you might spill just a bit on
yourself. Then you might spill a whole lot more on yourself. She's not the
only one to do this, as you've suggested, she's just the only one to not get
any kind of compensation from MD, and so got a lot of publicity from the
lawsuit.
> > are quite flimsy. Had the water not been at a temperature that MD's own
> > people KNEW was too hot, it would not be an issue either.
> >
> > > > however. Contrary to popular belief, neither was the car moving,
nor
> > was
> > > > she driving. Her grandson pulled over after the drive-through and
> > stopped
> > > > so his grandmother could take the lid off and add cream and sugar.
> The
> > > > flimsy cup spilled
>
> How? Give me details. Did a hole appear?
As mentioned above, I don't think there are any details, point conceded.
> > Thank you for illustrating my point. MD's motivation is profit, pure
and
> > simple, which in itself is fine, but not at the cost of a dangerous
> threat.
> > Do you not get this?
>
> I understand the profit model of business yes. How do you not get this:
>
> She spilled it on herself.
So what? Did she also set the temperature of the coffee? How'd she do
that?
> >It would have cost them more money to make the product
> > considerably safer than to simply let people injure themselves and then
> just
> > pay those people. There's a point where safety should come ahead of
> profit.
> > What am I saying? I'm arguing this with the person who thinks that
> > unemployment compensation is a hand-out.
>
> Unemployment is not pertinent to this discussion but, I would rather not
pay
> for it and take care of myself yes.
Okay, sorry for bringing that one up, wasn't fair of me.
> > You sound a lot like a person I argued with (equally pointless) in
> > alt.misc.kids who stated that he didn't need no derned car seats for his
> > kids... when he was a kid, his dad's arm did fine keeping him from
flying
> > through a window should there be a car crash. After all, he's a good
> > driver, too. Shit happens that parents can't always control. So if MD
>
> Again, not pertinent to the discussion but:
>
> If he doesn't use car seats for his kids he's an idiot. But I question
the
> need for the government to spend time and resources to force parents to
use
> car seats. I use them because I have common sense.
Likewise, sorry, had my dander up (doesn't happen all that often, really).
It's done to protect kids whose parents are idiots.
> > wants to serve coffee at near boiling point for profit purposes, it's
okay
> > if some of that spills on my family. By the way, the reason that this
> > makes better profit for MD is because the coffee "keeps" longer at
higher
> > temperatures. There's no other advantage that I'm aware of.
>
> So, Chevy's serves their fajitas on a hot plate so it comes to you freshly
> cooked. They don't warn you that it's still cooking. If you put a piece
> of that steak in your mouth, you WILL burn yourself. I don't think anyone
> has sued Chevy's to date. Why not?
Probably because burning your mouth on a hot piece of steak will not cause
$20,000 in medical costs and over a week in a hospital.
> > If you need a very hot plate to produce some fajitas, then you need it.
> You
> > don't NEED to have coffee at 185 degrees. Go ahead, slurp down that hot
> > coffee.
>
> I'd rather have it hot than cold. Have you had coffee that's gotten
> cold..... ugh...
Hot is relative, so is cold.
> > Okay, you win. Let's start serving coffee at 211 degrees now.
>
> I don't believe I ever made the argument that they should increase the
> temperature of the coffee. Where do you see that I said that?
You didn't, but if you're saying 185 degrees isn't too hot, what is? You
said it can't be too hot, didn't you?
> But I haven't seen evidence to contridict this:
>
> She spilled it on herself.
It's that simple?
--
Fris "Everything's black & white" bee® MCNGP #13
http://www.mcngp.tk
The MCNGP Team - We're here to help
| |
| 70-228 2002-08-14, 12:23 pm |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in message
> Then wouldn't it be the cup manufacturers responsibility? There many more
No. Point of purchase is the responsible party. If you book from Amazon and
it's and it's missing the last 20 pages you go to Amazon not the book
publisher. They then correct the problem or give you your money back. If the
publisher is truly at fault then Amazon makes a claim direct.
So in the McD case if the problem was the cups then McD are the ones to seek
compensation from whoever made the cup citing the case as their proof.
This is to protect the customer in several ways:
1) it stops resellers selling faulty products knowingly because they are the
first port of call.
2) it makes claims much easier when there is a genuine problem. Making a
claim against Amazon is much easier than making it against Corgi Books. They
are even set-up to deal with individuals whereas Corgi is set-up to deal
with bulk buyers.
3) the culpable party IS still responsible. Amazon is in a much better
position to make a claim against Corgi Books than the customer.
Remember the above if you ever buy a faulty product. It's the guy you buy it
from that has to fix it. Not the guy who built it.
| |
| SWalters 2002-08-14, 1:23 pm |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in
news:eA6DpY6QCHA.4040@tkmsftngp09:
> Personal responsiblity is a term that has lost all meaning on
> Americans I'm afraid.
>
I don't agree with anyone sueing anyone for their own negligence but you
lost your credibility after the above statement. So, being that I am an
American, I have no understanding of what "Personal responsibility" means?
-SW
| |
|
| > I don't agree with anyone sueing anyone for their own negligence but you
> lost your credibility after the above statement. So, being that I am an
> American, I have no understanding of what "Personal responsibility" means?
>
My arguments shouldn't lose credibility just my personality.
| |
|
| > How is this satisfying some of their customers? You want coffee that's
too
> hot to drink? What, to look at?
Personal opinion: I'd rather have it too hot than too cold.
> When was it ever stated that the vehicle was moving?
This just puts more of the burden on her.
> Okay, sorry for bringing that one up, wasn't fair of me.
> Likewise, sorry, had my dander up (doesn't happen all that often, really).
That's fine, these discussions often fly all over the place. And I have no
problem defending my opinions on other subjects.
> It's done to protect kids whose parents are idiots.
>
I agree that there are parents who are idiots and I don't have a huge
problem with the law. I just worry because that government is slowly
chipping away at freedoms just to protect us from ourselves. I'd rather
make my own mistakes. Although I agree that there are children involved and
they don't get a choice. I'm not sure what the best solution is.
> Probably because burning your mouth on a hot piece of steak will not cause
> $20,000 in medical costs and over a week in a hospital.
I'll buy that argument.
>
> Hot is relative, so is cold.
Yes. Maybe I like it that hot. I don't have an issue with hot coffee. And
when I spill it on myself (not that I have you understand), I don't blame
anyone but myself.
> You didn't, but if you're saying 185 degrees isn't too hot, what is? You
> said it can't be too hot, didn't you?
Maybe if they served it as steam it would be too hot. Of course, I'd know
I was getting a cup of steam and would be VERY careful with it.
> It's that simple?
Yes, yes it is that simple.
| |
| SWalters 2002-08-14, 3:23 pm |
| "Jtyc" <yo@respondtothegroup.com> wrote in news:O04ItZ8QCHA.2620
@tkmsftngp11:
> My arguments shouldn't lose credibility just my personality.
Ok...let me say it in another way:
One tends to not agree with someone who makes such immature statements.
--
-=SW=-
- MCP
| |
|
| > Ok...let me say it in another way:
>
> One tends to not agree with someone who makes such immature statements.
>
It was a generalization which is often used in discussions or arguments to
make a point or draw attention to something. It obviously does not apply to
every single American. I for one understand the meaning of personal
responsibility and preach it often (sometimes to the annoyance of others).
If you were offended by it than I apologize but I still stand by my
generalization. In general, Americans like to avoid personal
responsibility. If they didn't, we wouldn't have welfare, social security,
Democrats etc...
There used to be a time in this country, if you offered a man money to help
him out, he'd take it as a personal insult.
|
|
|
|
|