Subject:
|
Re: The Free Super Chiefs
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 22 Mar 2002 06:00:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
389 times
|
| |
|
|
To point out a few flaws in the logic...
In lugnet.trains, Jeremy Scott writes:
> Hey now, that is really not fair. A: Everyone tries to get around the
> system at some time. If you want/need 4 soda bottles but the limit is two,
> don't you just go to another checkot with the others???
Not really the same thing as buying two and walking out the door with 2 you
didn't pay for. If you buy two and then go to another line and buy two more, or
perhaps drive across town to buy two more, that's not stealing. Receiving
property you did not pay for is stealing.
> In the first place,
> it is not fair that the first quality set lego has made in years is limited
> to three per household. B: "Just to spite you" is not a threat. This is
> just a statement that illistrates to the guy that we will get our extra
> three any way. C: How is the fact that TLC screwed up and sent us three
> without charge, us stealing? If you got anything from LSAH for free, you
> would keep it and I will sure bet that a similar message from you would be
> on these newsgroups.
No, actually honest people would probably call LEGO Shop@Home and say, "what
gives?" Or perhaps they might mark on the package "refused receipt of goods" in
which case the mail carrier, USPS, UPS, or FEDEX is obligated to return the
package to the sender.
>
> I'm sorry if my _original_ message offended you, but yours accused me and my
> Dad as being bad people and that offended me.
Has your dad ever told you that its not the message its the way the message was
presented? The message in an of itself is nothing offensive. The manner and
nature it was presented in was offensive to those of us that work hard for
everything we get and then have to listen to people gloat about how easy they
got it. ;^)
> I shared this story as fun, innocent entertainment while the rest of the
> newsgroups are bickering. Looks like you've made this post into another
> negative thread.
I think you should keep the message you sent and 20 years from now when you
have children, reread the message you sent and see if you still agree it was
fun and innocent. The hardest part of growing up, at least it was for me, was
realizing when to admit that a mistake was made. Some of us have been trying to
tell you in a subtle way (the beat around the bush without getting to the point
way) that you goofed when you sent the message about "Free Super Chiefs."
>
> Jeremy Scott
>
> PS - For all who read this, please take to heart my words and think twice
> before posting a negative reply message on someones positive threads. (That
> includes all those grammar cops! You guys bug us all and it is not neccesary.)
You know the best part of a free society is the negative stuff. If you want to
control what people say and its negative/positive nature then you can no longer
expect your opinion and beliefs to be allowed in that society. I am sorry that
we do not agree with your position on this and several seem to have come down
hard on you, but that's the nature of a free society. Not everyone agrees with
your position.
It's also important to remember that on the moral, ethical scale your position
here is less than tenable. Whenever you try to argue from the a-moral,
unethical side of the arguement, you have a deep hole to dig yourself out of. I
am sorry to say that while others seemed to think that receiving stuff in the
mail that you didn't pay for is okay and does not place you in a less than
legal position, they are wrong and need an ethics course. Regardless of who
sent you the item or how it was received, if you didn't pay for it or win it as
a part of a contest and have documents stipulating as such, you are in
possession of items that the law would consider "stolen." The question now is
whether LEGO Shop@Home will seek restitution. Unfortunately, you advertised
your possession in a very public forum and it remains to be seen whether LEGO
Shop@Home will take notice and take action.
Clutch your lucky rabbits foot or what other luck idol you possess and hope
LEGO Shop@Home doesn't think $120 worth of merchandise is worth their time and
effort to recover. Good Luck to you!
Sincerely, and again with all due respect.
Todd
>
> PPS
> If this thread has to continue on past this meassge, I'm sending it
> somewhere where I don't go: FUT: lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Super Chiefs all gone?
|
| Looks like we're through the limited edition run of Super Chiefs, at least originating in Europe. Yesterday it was listed as backordered, ship within 30 days but still with the limited edition description. Today it says Ship by 24 April, and the (...) (23 years ago, 19-Mar-02, to lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.trains)
|
64 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
