1352
I'm happy to move if they'd pay for my meal
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2024
1352 points (97.1% liked)
Microblog Memes
5535 readers
2062 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Empathy, citizen. Empathy.
Why add to the stressful shit of the Universe. Just be kind.
Or she could've learned some manners and not asked people who are eating to move
She was asking for a favor. Human beings do that sometimes. It's a shared limited public resource.
Well then she could be a daddy's girl who got everything she ever wanted and just doesn't understand the concept that the world doesn't revolve around her. Glad someone could show it to her.
Such a strange immature response to that comment. You know nothing about that person, you don't know their maturity level, or what they've been given in life for free and what they needed to fight for.
All they did was ask if the person could finish up so that she could have the table, a shared resource that's in limited supply that all citizens would need to use at that restaurant.
You know sometimes you really don't have to be such hard asses to each other, truly. Even if it was a little over the top, we only have one side of what was literally said, and the tone of how it was said was not included at all.
I've been almost done with a meal and somebody askes me if I'll be vacating the table soon. I'll answer them yes, especially in a crowded venue.
I would consider it rude the hog the table, especially when there are no tables available and I'm done with my meal. My ego is not that fragile that I can't handle doing another human being a favor and getting out of there so they can have the table (as long as I'm done that is).
Its such a weird thing to argue over, and looking at the downvotes, it seems like people here on Lemmy are just really pissed off at people these days (or they are conflict bots). No good things will come from that level of anger.
and I consider it similarly rude to just walk up and tell someone "hurry up".
why are you acting like the person at the table now is inherently inferior to the one that wants the table? OP is "hogging" the table as much as the girl would have when she sat with her friends. less, because she's there to meet someone socially and not just eat and leave. she'll be "hogging the table" for a lot longer. if someone new walks in right when her friend sits down with her and says "leave, this is my table now", you believe the correct course of action would be to immediately end the friend meetup and vacate immediately, as commanded? what if the new person is just 1 person? what if the new person represents a party of 5?
if your goal, as it seems, is to minimized use of the shared resources to maximize throughput use and thus make it available for the most people, then you would not support the idea of meeting friends at a restaurant at all.
why is the person sitting alone using the table for its intended purpose of eating a meal from the restaurant inherently inferior to a person wanting to claim a space to sit at and socialize for a while? why are the latter so superior that it justifies such rude behavior towards the prior?
It's a shared resource in limited supply.
The rudeness would definitely be on the person hogging it.
why do you believe a single person using the table to eat food from the establishment is "hogging" it, whereas two people using the table for a social meeting aren't?
Why would you meet socially at a restaurant if you're not going to eat, especially one that's so busy that it's hard to find seating?
You would find somewhere else with more seating that doesn't serve food if your only goal was to socially interact with each other.
You've been arguing so much in the comments that you've forgotten OP's stated story and adopted your own fiction to defend. Like you said, it's a weird thing to argue over, because what you're talking about is not what anybody else is talking about. That's why you're getting down voted. But sure, convince yourself it's pissed off people or "conflict bots," whatever the hell that is. More fiction for your la-di-da world.
Where I come from if someone gracefully asked if I'd be leaving soon I'd have no problem accommodating them if it suited me fine. The operative word is suited, because I don't owe strangers anything. I can choose to be generous, or be in my right to reserve my generosity for someone who is more deserving. Doing so doesn't make me a bad person.
However, this is not what happened according to OP. The person suggested they hurry because they needed their table. That's so rude I'm completely blown away at your effort here in the comments to white wash it and scold others for not being doormats like you want to be. Have fun with that.
If people are truly that hateful, then we are truly fucked.
Also, just go Google up "Bots Manipulate Public Opinion " and read.
As far as the rest of your diatribe, is intellectually dishonest, mischaracterizes my position, and I disagree with it.
I stand by what I've said.
Idc
I guess that's what it really just comes down to, if you care for others, or think only for yourself.
why would you care for people who exploit the baseline care given from others but themselves do not care for others? you're enabling and encouraging this breakdown of societal care by accommodating the loud-mouth arrogant bullies like the "hurry up" woman to the degree that you seemingly elevate them above the average person.
"being kind" does not mean "being a doormat", you seem to have conflated those things.
You're assuming a lot of facts that are not in evidence.
It's not shared. It's his until he's finished with his meal a meal he paid for and is at liberty to consume at whatever pace is most enjoyable to him.
It's shared. He doesn't bring his own table and chairs with him.
You don't bring your own seat on an airplane either. It comes with you purchasing a flight to a destination. Those certainly aren't shared.
Those seats are assigned to you, not one that you obtain yourself.
I mentioned in another comment about how different restaurant venues have it where sometimes you have to get your own seating, and other times the restaurant gets the seating for you. The airline would be the same thing as the restaurant getting the seating for you.
I'm talking about you having to get your seat yourself, not assigned by the restaurant.
The seats are still owned by the restaurant and designated for people who have paid for meals. They don't typically welcome people who are not buying to come sit down. So it's not a "shared resource". You pay for a meal, you get a table until you're finished. If you want to share that table or not is up to you or the rules of the restaurant.
Two people can't sit in the same chair at the same time, so it's a shared resource.
And again, we're not talking about ownership, we're talking about usage, by ALL customers.
You're being intellectually dishonest, and it shows with the quality of your responses.
That's exactly what makes it not shared. Only one person can use it at a time and they are entitled to it for the duration of their meal. Demanding that they rush through their meal so you can have it is hardly sharing.
Intellectually dishonest? How? Just because I don't agree with you doesn't make that true.
No it doesn't, because they both have a need for it and one is finishing their need, and the other one is going to need. It's a transactional event thats happening, and if the person who's using it doesn't need it anymore they can move on and release the resource for the next person to use. And if they don't, then they're being rude and selfish.
Again, you're being intellectually dishonest. I say that because I know you understand the concept of one thing needed to be used by two people so they take turns using the thing and not hogging up the thing when they know another person needs the thing.
That was not being said (again being intellectually dishonest by misrepresenting what was being said). The person was inquiring when they would be done. No demand was being made.
"Hurry up and finish your breakfast, my friend is coming and wants your seat." Is not asking when he'll be done. They're asking him to rush through it. Not rushing through your meal so they can have it faster is not "hogging" the seat. He paid for that meal and is entitled to enjoy it at his own pace.
I'm going to not continue the conversation at this point, as I'm just repeating myself now, especially since you're not being intellectually honest about replying to the points I'm stating directly, and instead you go around them and bring up a different points already discussed and answered.
You can look at the other comments I've made on this subject and get a full understanding of where I'm coming from, if you care, which I suspect you really don't, based on our conversation.
Dude I bet people walk all over you
I bet you’re a dick
I wouldn't take that bet tbh
Quite the opposite actually.
It's okay to be nice to other people, truly. It makes the World a better place.
She was not. She was ordering OP to finish and leave, because she viewed herself as more valuable and more entitled to the shared resource than OP is, and therefore expected them to comply.
If she had merely asked for a favor instead of issuing an order, it could have been different.