Yggstyle @ yggstyle @lemmy.world

Just another voice yelling in the void.

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

428

Joined

2 yr. ago

While yes I feel you on this ... the boomers are probably going deaf and need the extra volume... the asshats who have the phone on speaker like a goddamn walkie talkie in those same public places should be drawn and quartered.

Generally a bigger push towards "maybe don't be a pubic nuisance" for everyone: regardless of age/generation couldn't hurt.

The explanation was fabricated to make the customer 'go away.' Which they should: to a different location that isn't so profit oriented and staffed with drones that lack common sense.

Dunkin' has done some sneaky shrinkflation, but there is a certain mechanical clarity...

I promise you that they have done just that: like every other corporation has. The mechanical clarity is imagined but provides a fine excuse. That machine is configurable - just like any other timed / measured device. Yeah you pushed the 'small latte' button ... but is that the same small late that x franchise sells across the street (who owns the same machine but different size cups?) It's software. Anyone who doesn't think that dunkin' - a profit driven organization - isn't going to milk the customer for every penny they can get... is either daft or willfully ignorant.

edit: wording

I don't wanna fully don the tin foil hat but it's a lot easier to poison a well when there's less water if you get my meaning...

edit:

I looked up the pricing.

This whole thread is now hilarious. I'll be getting out that tin foil after all.

I'm with you on that: but generally speaking a lot of the non iced variants cost the same because it's hard to explain to people how little they are getting with ice. This was more an issue with the person serving the beverage than the cost. Admittedly it could have been a training issue but I cannot come up with a good valid reason for the choice.

Edit:

Turns out iced costs more. OP was actually helping them out.

Let me pose a question here: most chains actually sell coffee at the same (or similar) price as any other fountain drink. What's the difference then? Was the 1/2 ice too hard of an order? The machine is preprogrammed for roughly the time it would take to fill an ice filled drink. Was the person filling the drink pre-programmed to not be able to problem solve? Based on the thread responses I'm inclined to answer that as self evident.

Edit:

Called It. What's the excuse now?

Man unless they state somewhere that each drink only contains x oz I'd be a cunt and tell em to keep pouring. After that: yeah last time I'm visiting that chain. Customers aren't always right but in this case they probably are.

As an (ex) bartender I know what you're talking about... we would never over pour a spirit ... but if asked we'd generally have no issue topping off the mixer. There is a difference. The literal difference between a modern iced beverage and an uniced one (depending on cup size and ice) can sometimes be 2-3 times the beverage... which while quite significant amounts to pennies in cost (if that.) More will be lost to a line cleaning, incorrect orders, etc than to a customer request. The fact that so many in this thread are defending the chain is mind boggling. This same chain likely has been upping the recommended ice and even potentially messing with the mix % to further dilute the beverage in the name of profit. Fuck that. These chains frequently show a cup size and list the oz on the container. They rarely, if ever, list the oz of the beverage in said cup because it would cause a riot. Unless they say 4oz of coffee per 12oz cup of iced coffee somewhere: the customer is absolutely right to expect however much coffee fits in the damn cup and not a drop less. That's what they were advertised- and that's what they paid for.

Some of y'all need to realize you're in a guilded cage and that you are indoctrinated by capitalist owners. This isn't even a big issue.

Edit:

Fucking lol. Jesus.

Sorry: no. I call bullshit. I ordered a beverage.

You provided the ice.

I will not sit and let someone take the apologists route for a corporation on this. Drinks are, without question, the highest margin item on the menu in most places and frequently are over iced past recommended mix levels (by the drink manufacturer) as a way to stretch that further.

I personally rarely get ice because those machines are rarely cleaned and are mold nightmares. Go ahead, ask your friends in the industry why they don't use the ice machine.

Edit: I actually bothered to look it up-

A large Late (Hot) - $6.30

A large Late (Iced) - $6.83

That's right: the same drink with less beverage costs more

Expensive ice I guess. Turns out OP was doing them a solid.

One of those cuts into the profits of the gun manufacturers. Tell me which has the bigger lobbying group 😅.

Only if you say it louder while licking the boots of the people taking said freedoms away. Also you need to firmly believe that you are the free-est country in the world. Belief in angels is optional for now.

Ketchup demands a firing squad.

*Facebook

Or their fans - consequently.

and... get this: while you were swapping your battery you could drop in a swappable expansion on storage. Utter madness.

Hey now that would only be 15ish cents of 2020 money. Better spend that now before it's only worth 50% of what it's worth currently.

I started my reasons for thinking you are wrong but I'll clarify: It's illogical and baseless.

I'll expand.

While neither of our assessments of the unfortunate ends these people had are based in hard fact - one of them is far more probable:

Option A: multiple people tied up in whistleblowing cases involving large profit driven corporations both lied and got 'caught' in the lie (despite not giving testimony yet in many of these cases) ... and elect to independently off themselves. Each time.

Option B: A whistleblower threatens exposing said companies to considerable losses or penalties (which would likely result in losses.) It is decided by the company or an individual in the company (who probably has something to lose or gain) that the whistleblower needs to go. Whistleblower commits suicide by dubious means.

Option C: Basically option B but whistleblower is racked with guilt for being part of whatever occurred and opts to take their life as a means of atonement (misguided as that can be.)

Two of these options rely on simple logical human behavior well known to tie into death: greed and corruption - and guilt and sorrow. Your option suggests broadly that, under minimal pressure, all/most of these people are just sprinting to the most extreme exit under scrutiny. The odds of that being the case, repeatedly, are infinitesimally small. Corruption and corporations go hand in hand and you don't have to look hard to find a case of it.

So I'll reiterate: it is my opinion that your opinion is based in a world of pure fantasy... and only an idiot or a troll would actually believe it.

I'd wager that baseless claims such as these are statistically likely to be backed by click farms and corporations looking to control a narrative or, at the very least, create enough noise to muddy the signal.

I could go on- but the point is made.

On the off chance you actually have that thought rattling around in that cavern between your ears... I think you need to possibly exercise more critical thought and familiarize yourself with concepts like Occam's razor.

Everyone is absolutely entitled to their opinion... Including you. With that said: it is my opinion that you are either a paid actor, an idiot, or a troll.

I am speaking from a position with a fair bit of inside knowledge within the industry. Executive decisions do not mirror the whole workplace. Frequently there are engineers and employees who, despite the position they put themselves in, speak up for the end users cause. This is shown time and again through leaks, inquiries, and whistleblowing. It is an exhausting position to take and in most cases a thankless job. Seeing someone applaud your efforts, regardless of outcome, can be a meaningful morale boost.

Speaking directly to this topic: tags exist and already are being used. Recall that it is not just Google who provides these... apple and other platforms do as well. They have their use which arguably was the intent originally... but as with all tools they can be abused. Apple and Google have acknowledged this but it is difficult to put the genie back in the bottle... so solutions must be provided. This is one of those solutions. It's a start- and will likely result in some people being protected where they otherwise would not have been. That is praiseworthy in my opinion. It is in its own way a check against unregulated tracking that is user controlled. That is good. Does it change the company or its mandate? No. But these are two different things.