No names, but recently bought a new laptop for my son and a tower PC for the home office.
WHY is it so difficult for a major chain store to operate a decent stock system and simply sell you what you want.
1. Select item to buy.
2. Find staff member.
3. Check item is in stock - no it's not.
4. Go to next store where they have stock.
5. Repeat steps 1-3 ( it is in stock, but is reserved)
6. Select alternate item.
7. Repeat steps 1-3 then 6 three times.
8. Walk out of store and buy item cheaper in a non-specialist store.
When you can buy what you want there is then the the hassle of persuading the staff you really don't want support, insurance, any other items. Just sell me the damn thing please.
Most of the staff are trying their best to be helpful, but are caught in the inflexible systems. I had a wonderful explanation for the item being out of stock. Apparently I was selecting the best value most popular PCs 'which keep running out of stock'. I thought a basic stock system should identify fast selling lines and ensure they can keep selling them.
I know I'm not the only individual who's been put off this particular shop - it takes too long to identify out of stock items which is just so frustrating. No discount is given if the display model is all that is left, and I was told it can take three hours to re-initialise the disk and memory before sale is possible. They're not even particularly good value.
Progress? Bah Humbug.
Saturday 29 October 2011
Wednesday 26 October 2011
7 Billion people
OMG to use a detested abbreviation. How crowded is SE England going to get?
Nature is sure to have a few tricks up it's sleeve. If we don't limit our population or destroy it with wars, some disease or something totally unexpected will do it for us.
Just hope it's not too nasty for my own family.
Nature is sure to have a few tricks up it's sleeve. If we don't limit our population or destroy it with wars, some disease or something totally unexpected will do it for us.
Just hope it's not too nasty for my own family.
Saturday 22 October 2011
Being reasonable V. enforcement by law
Following on from my last post, it's been suggested that in many cases it's OK to break the law if you're 'reasonable'. I understand the logic behind this - it can't make any difference travelling at just a few mph over the speed limit, throwing a biodegradable item down can't be littering, cycling on the pavement is OK if you're careful of pedestrians rights.
Yes, fine. But everyone has their own standards of what is reasonable. Indeed if we were all reasonable, there would be no need for any laws at all. It's not reasonable to take things that aren't yours. It's not reasonable to drive a car without well maintained brakes or without the means to compensate a victim of your driving errors.
Laws are there to establish a minimum level of what is reasonable behaviour. You may disagree with some of them, but if you break the laws you dislike you can't complain with others breaking laws you do agree with. Going back to my bugbear of illegal cyclists on the pavements, many of them start out meaning to be responsible and careful of pedestrians, but familiarity and 'getting away with it' leads to increased speeds and risk taking. Same with car drivers speeding I suppose.
I'll just repeat that. Laws are there to establish a MINIMUM level of what is reasonable behaviour. To create a pleasant environment for all of us, decent citizens need to go far beyond the minimum and be polite and considerate to their fellow human beings. Remember that car you're cutting up to reach your destination a few seconds sooner contains a person just like you who is going to be stressed and annoyed by your behaviour.
If we lived at a density of one person per square mile you could do whatever you like without upsetting anyone. I seem to remember experiments in the seventies where rats were put in overcrowded situations resulting in stress and aggression - very similar to what is seen in overcrowded urban environments now.
We need to either shoot half the population (the mathematical solution) or realise that we are ultimately harming ourselves by indulging in selfish, inconsiderate and possibly criminal behaviour. In a crowded environment your every action affects other people. Play nice.
Yes, fine. But everyone has their own standards of what is reasonable. Indeed if we were all reasonable, there would be no need for any laws at all. It's not reasonable to take things that aren't yours. It's not reasonable to drive a car without well maintained brakes or without the means to compensate a victim of your driving errors.
Laws are there to establish a minimum level of what is reasonable behaviour. You may disagree with some of them, but if you break the laws you dislike you can't complain with others breaking laws you do agree with. Going back to my bugbear of illegal cyclists on the pavements, many of them start out meaning to be responsible and careful of pedestrians, but familiarity and 'getting away with it' leads to increased speeds and risk taking. Same with car drivers speeding I suppose.
I'll just repeat that. Laws are there to establish a MINIMUM level of what is reasonable behaviour. To create a pleasant environment for all of us, decent citizens need to go far beyond the minimum and be polite and considerate to their fellow human beings. Remember that car you're cutting up to reach your destination a few seconds sooner contains a person just like you who is going to be stressed and annoyed by your behaviour.
If we lived at a density of one person per square mile you could do whatever you like without upsetting anyone. I seem to remember experiments in the seventies where rats were put in overcrowded situations resulting in stress and aggression - very similar to what is seen in overcrowded urban environments now.
We need to either shoot half the population (the mathematical solution) or realise that we are ultimately harming ourselves by indulging in selfish, inconsiderate and possibly criminal behaviour. In a crowded environment your every action affects other people. Play nice.
Friday 21 October 2011
Facebook friends
Just been defriended by a guy on facebook because I disagreed with his views on Dale farm.
He posted on a contentious issue, in my view (I live quite near the site) he was very misinformed about what was going on there. He dismissed several people posting views opposed to his own as 'gypsy haters' and told them to 'p*** off' with use of the f word elsewhere on his posts.
Seems to me he thought his views were 'good' and therefore could not be challenged by mere facts. This way leads to prejudice, bigotry and intolerance of others' views. You see the same thing with animal welfare fanatics, eco-warriors and indeed pavement cyclists. Their idea they are doing 'good' things seems to blind them to any rational arguments that they may be in the wrong.
Swearing and name calling have no place on any public forum, it's simply crass rudeness to all who see the posts.
The higher the density we live at, and the greater the ease of mass communication, the more important it becomes that we all 'play nice' and are polite and tolerant to each other. Hostility and a refusal to consider other peoples rights harms us all through increased levels of minor stress we have to constantly bear.
Smiles, please, thank you and sorry cost us nothing but give both the donor and recipient a better life.
I do my casual jobs well and often receive spontaneous thanks and have even had the occasional round of applause. While I need the money the jobs bring, I value the thanks higher than mere cash.
He posted on a contentious issue, in my view (I live quite near the site) he was very misinformed about what was going on there. He dismissed several people posting views opposed to his own as 'gypsy haters' and told them to 'p*** off' with use of the f word elsewhere on his posts.
Seems to me he thought his views were 'good' and therefore could not be challenged by mere facts. This way leads to prejudice, bigotry and intolerance of others' views. You see the same thing with animal welfare fanatics, eco-warriors and indeed pavement cyclists. Their idea they are doing 'good' things seems to blind them to any rational arguments that they may be in the wrong.
Swearing and name calling have no place on any public forum, it's simply crass rudeness to all who see the posts.
The higher the density we live at, and the greater the ease of mass communication, the more important it becomes that we all 'play nice' and are polite and tolerant to each other. Hostility and a refusal to consider other peoples rights harms us all through increased levels of minor stress we have to constantly bear.
Smiles, please, thank you and sorry cost us nothing but give both the donor and recipient a better life.
I do my casual jobs well and often receive spontaneous thanks and have even had the occasional round of applause. While I need the money the jobs bring, I value the thanks higher than mere cash.
Monday 10 October 2011
The truth is out there
The truth may well be out there, but the important answers can be learnt by seeking within ourselves.
After living in the woods for a long weekend, I end up sounding like an aged hippy...
After living in the woods for a long weekend, I end up sounding like an aged hippy...
Sunday 2 October 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)