A post by Manatee in motoring about an insurance claim has a similar 'cause costs to the competition' reasoning as the following.
Agency i sometimes work for recently had a bad paying customer...queried everything including my work which annoyed me mucho as i give 110%, they paid substantially less than they should eventually, and are now obviously no longer a customer.
I asked if they shared such information (probably informally over a glass of something) about bad payers with other agencies, the answer was no and they seemed surprised at the suggestion, i got the feeling they'd like the competition to suffer to their cost.
I'm no businessman but common sense (don't start) tells me the only winner here is the bad payer.
Am i missing something, or is this the way business is conducted these days.
|
>>i give 110%
Can I have some of that stuff to put in my fuel tank?
Sorry, what do you call a numeric pedant? ;>)
LCD displays, PIN numbers, wing mirrors on doors, at the end of the day, It's a game of two halves and anyone who says haitch.
What winds you up?
|
To be pedantic BT, maybe GB meant he gives 110% of what he thinks some other drivers do - which may be possible;-)
Anyway it's very short sighted of the operators/agencies not to tip each other off - if they did, the no-intention-to-pay merchants would presumably have to behave themselves and all would be better off.
Last edited by: Manatee on Sat 5 Feb 11 at 00:24
|
I work for a large corporate, we have a customer that wanted us to take back some goods and refused to pay an unrelated invoice for £7500. I refused to take the goods back so credit management took over re the debt, the customer offerred 50% and they said "ok then", how do you call that managing credit? The rationale is that taking it legal would be costly though I can be sure that if I bought a car and refused to pay more than half of the cost I would have the weight of the law on me.
|
Oh dear, I see the post snippers have been at it again in this thread.
The now missing conversation was about the desirability of correct English in a CV - thoroughly innocuous.
OK, what's called pedantry on here divides opinion, but that doesn't mean those that wish to post about it should not be able to.
We've got few enough contributions as it is, without sending what we do have into cyberspace.
I had not posted on the thread, so have no axe to grind in that respect.
Some folk on here need to grow a thicker skin.
I've made a fool of myself on here a few times.
You just apologise - or not - and move on.
No need for all this damn censorship.
Last edited by: Iffy on Sat 5 Feb 11 at 09:43
|
It really is getting to the point that you have to ask yourself if it's worth posting anything if it's only going to be removed without notification or explanation.
I had it happen to me this week for no apparent reason and feel now that unless 'I toe the party line' it really isn't worth bothering.
Pat
|
>> No need for all this damn censorship.
>>
I agree. There was nothing in the disappeared posts that could/should have caused anyone any problem. Any more of this, and it will discourage the regular posters from saying anything useful at all.
|
Speaking of eating humble pie, looks like the pedantry conversation is in gb's other thread.
Maybe my claims of post snipping in this thread were made in error.
Apologies to other members/mods/management if they were, but I stick by the general point about censorship.
This place is not going to work if everyone feels as if they are walking on eggshells.
|
|
From my pov I do very little snipping or hiding, especially not without telling the OP and/or entering a comment in the thread. I think the others are the same and there could be other reasons for apparent loss of posts, maybe like you forgetting where you'd left them :-). Usually when I clip something the reason ought to be obvious to any and everybody - even if we can't agree on it.
|
Smokie, perhaps you could share your moderating ethics....:)
Pat
|
>> From my pov I do very little snipping or hiding, especially not without telling the
>> OP and/or entering a comment in the thread. I think the others are the same
Likewise. Doesn't stop me generally getting the blame for it though.
Only time I'll remove and not mention it is if it's blatantly obvious it shouldn't have been posted, ie an infringement of the C4P rules. If something has been snipped from this thread, then it can't have been me as I haven't been here since 17:00 Friday.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 5 Feb 11 at 16:48
|
>> Oh dear, I see the post snippers have been at it again in this thread.
I don't think this thread has been snipped Iffy, the comments you refer to are in the other thread ''why are these people employed'', and as far as i'm aware haven't been edited by the management.
Mind you whilst we're on the subject of sniping versus snipping, petty jibes at someone's lack of grammar and spelling perfection does spoil what could otherwise be a reasoned discourse.
It's usually those who have used the written word throughout their lives that poke at those of us that haven't had the same constant use of the language.
Is it really all that important in the grand scheme of things so long as the postings can be understood.
We can't all be perfect.
Edit...seems you've found the same.
As for walking on eggshells, some of us not quite so grammatically correct or with less than perfect spelling feel the same, within a few hours critical postings appear, it's a two way street.
Last edited by: gordonbennet on Sat 5 Feb 11 at 10:27
|
... it's a two way street...
Agreed.
I wasn't looking for another discussion on grammar, but trying to stick up for the more general principle of members feeling free to post as they wish.
|
Business method. - MD
