Things that annoy me . . . . And should

I am curious, too. What do you mean?

 

Weird flex, but okay. OfC, goat is high key, mid was prolly cringey, TBH. Cap. Alright, bet. I'm down. IKR? LMK.

 

I've a better chance of understanding that post about FTL and time travel.
Please stop.

 

It’s more of a debate room thing. So, won’t elaborate much. But just wanted to complain about grammar rules being tossed out because-insert politics-.

singular they is fine as long as the character is not in a group. Then it gets grammatically messy.

 

As far as I understand this (after googling it), this means:

"That sketch is trying too hard as f***, for future reference".

"Strange quirk, but OK. Of course, Greatest Of All Time is intense, middle was probably cringey, to be honest. No lie. All right, I understand it. I know, right? Let me know."

Hope that helps, B. E.

Hmm ... Seven Crowns, maybe you could create invoices for these fines in advance? If you know how much your bank is going to charge you, you can invoice them in advance.

"What are these invoices for?"

"You're going to charge me fines because my balance is below a certain limit? Fine. I'm going to charge you for charging me. Go ahead and call your manager. I got all day."

 

Ugh. So, like most people, I have two of those signs on my mailbox that say "No junk mail, please." But of course, that doesn't stop the buggers -- especially the political buggers.

There's a byelection coming up in my seat because the incumbent resigned, because he was caught in bed cheating on his wife. But that's none of my business. Anyway.

So tonight, I came home and found that someone -- I've no idea who -- decided to take some kind of cutting implement (scissors, maybe) to one of my signs, neatly cutting out the "No" and leaving in the "junk mail, please". Ha ha, tee hee, and ho ho. Aren't you clever.

I could probably replace that sign for a tenner or so, but that's not the point. I'm annoyed because this joker, whoever he is, only did that to my mailbox, not to the ones belonging to my neighbours. Grumble.

Besides, what kind of lazy Richard* goes around vandalizing people's property? What's wrong with a hobby? Or is picking on strangers' property a hobby now?

Sorry, I know I'm getting worked up, and I don't need to. It's just so senseless. Grumble.

_____________________
* "Richard" - old rhyming slang on "Richard the Third", as in "Richard the Third" = "Turd".

 

I wonder, how do those people in an office somewhere even see those signs?

One thing I like about email is that you can create rules to filter junk mail. Hard to do with actual paper mail.

 

With so-called "smart" technology these days, I wonder: why hasn't anyone developed a little robotic BEAR TRAP ( ) that can distinguish between real mail and junk mail?

I know that's probably in the realm of science fiction, but if someone figured out how to make it work, I'd buy it.
==============
Anyway, as for something that annoys me ... this doesn't annoy me, but it's incredibly concerning: Meta is Eliminating their Fact Checkers and "Loosening" Speech Policies. (The Register, a UK IT Magazine)

This has already resulted, if an article on CNN can be believed, in people being allowed to call women "property" and "household objects".

Meta is turning into Twitter ... isn't it wonderful.

 

It's bad enough that tickets to see the national championship game with Notre Dame vs. Ohio State are $1,800 each (!!!), but the fees to buy scalped tickets are also $700 each. So, for my wife and me, a pair of tickets into the game are literally $5,000!!!

Scream!!!!!!

 

Omfg. I am so sorry they cost so much.

 

Bleh. Five grand is not worth it.

Is the game on TV? I know it's not the same as being there, but if it's on TV, at least you can see it and cheer on your team.

 

I feel your pain. Around here, we average about £4.50 for a pack of 8.

 

I feel you fellow Coke addict, I'm still buying for the Mrs. and I when on sale which is not not a sale. I heard the Food Lion house brand cola was worth giving a try???

 

$4.25 for a 12-pack of Coke? Lucky you, Seven Crowns. Here in Australia, a 12-pack of Coke would set me back $20, easy. ($20 AUS is $12.57 USD).

If I want soft drinks, I buy one of the large 1.25-litre bottles; they're cheaper.

As for something that annoys me? Customers that get angry at me for no reason.

About 20 years ago, I worked in a company that ran pediatric courses for doctors and nurses who wanted to be pediatricians (and help children).

One hospital ran a course of ours. We had an arrangement, where the hospital would pay most of the bills, and the participants would pay $50 each.

Most participants paid on time (or very slightly late), except for one nurse who didn't pay for almost 8 weeks.

I sent her an email 4 weeks in ... no answer. I sent another one two weeks later ... no answer. Another email the week after ... no answer.

I finally gave her a polite call, and she shouted and swore at me, said she would pay, and hung up.

A week later, I got a cheque from her, and on the back she wrote: "Here is your money, now F*** OFF!!!"

I think that was my first angry customer. I lost a lot of faith in humanity that day.

But all I can say is: if this nurse (I presume she's a nurse) is like that with a random supplier, I shudder to think how she is with patients ...

 

Well, now I have a good reason for trying not to drive: some people in cars are both crazy and scary.

I was driving down a two-way street to the supermarket this morning, and a man in a car was coming towards me. Rather than stick to his lane, he drove half in his lane and half in mine, thus blocking the whole street. And he refused to cooperate. It could easily have been a head-on collision, but I slowed down and pulled over. Some people think they own the road. Not funny.

Then, when I was coming back home, I slowed down and started to turn into my driveway ... and instead of waiting two seconds, the guy behind me leaned on the horn and gave me a great big *HONK!!!!*

Humanity sucks. We should all go and live in Pinky's World. NARF!

 

I recently took -- and passed -- an online safe driving course, having been advised that submitting the certificate to my insurer would result in a discount on my premium. So I called my insurer and they said sure, and told me where to send it. I did. A couple hours later I got a message from my insurer acknowledging receipt of the certificate and advising me that my rate had increased by $16. I called to object, and got passed around a bit, and was finally told it must be a glitch in the system that would likely be fixed by the next day. It wasn't. So I called again, and persisted, explaining it wasn't so much the amount as the irrationality of it that irked me. Finally I got a guy who told me that, unfortunately, it was correct actuarially. What happened was this: the insurer only gave discounts to the "primary" driver, and until I had sent in the certificate they had presumed my wife was the primary driver, but in order to apply the "discount" they had to presume I am the primary driver and, being older and male, I am statistically a riskier driver, so that deeming me primary increased our overall premium, absorbing and surpassing any granted discount. I asked if it made sense to punish me for advising them that I had passed a course that ostensibly made me a safer driver. The guy said it didn't make sense in a real-world sense. I said we are in the real world. Finally he simply went back and fixed it so that my submission would be ignored, and we were back where we were, except that I did get a one-dollar discount for some reason. So the $25 I spent on the safe-driving course ended up costing me $24, and my insurer got a safer driver for free.

 

This sounds very frustrating and annoying, but I hope you'll forgive me for finding it delightfully absurd. I love that you reminded the guy that we are in the real world.

 

I'm so sorry, Graham. No-one ever said insurance had anything to do with common sense.