What's new

How would you respond to this comment?

TexLaw

Fussy Evil Genius
I world just move on. I'd probably smile a little, meekly.

Your problem, Captain, is that she was right, even if you caused no harm. If you are going to play with the rules for your convenience, you better be prepared to take comments gracefully.
 
A dear departed friend used to always tell me: "other people's behavior is about them, not about me. today I choose to be responsible for my own actions and allow others to do the same." what she said screamed volumes about her. wish her well and move on. Obviously easier said than done.
 

Chan Eil Whiskers

Fumbling about.
"You might be surprised at how much I agree with you that rules are not meant to be broken. Where we seem to differ is that I think rules are not meant to be worshiped either. They are meant to be applied with common sense, and most often with some latitude for special circumstances. In my case, I have a huge load to carry, and the post office makes no provision for me to safely drop off my parcels. Sure, it's true that I do it more quickly this way, but it is also true that my life would be at risk and traffic would be slowed and inconvenienced if I had to make 10 or 20 trips across the roadway each time I came here. How would that help anyone? Now I'm guessing you may have been bullied or otherwise done wrong by people who ignored the rules, but if you knew me better, you would know that I am not one of them. I don't want to upset or take advantage of anyone. I'm just trying to exercise my right - baked into the Constitution no less - to get my postal business done, and to do it safely and without taking half a day."

I think you would be lucky if you got to read that script without interruption, but if you did, you and the lady might both be headed down a happier road. But as I said, that's the armchair version of the script.

I agree with this point of view (in a way), but I don't think I would have parked somewhere other than the designated parking space without having first obtained permission from the post office to do so. Even at the free standing post offices I use there is no designated area very close to the door where one can park and unload a lot of packages. Perhaps there should be but there isn't.

We could come up with a properly worded response by the old lady, too, couldn't we, in which she might explain that your rationalization for rule breaking failed to trump her right of passage?

Happy shaves,

Jim
 

FarmerTan

"Self appointed king of Arkoland"
Parking and Standing (for the sake of unloading a delivery) are entirely different things! Keep that grin!!!
Actually, very good point! And I will assume the lady in question had just gotten a ticket for giving the finger to a person that she didn't know was a cop, right @Rhody ?

I am very good at assuming the world revolves around me, and have a hard time excusing other people's behavior. I'm a "work in progress" I suppose.

Thanks, @Captain Pre-Capsize , for unintentionally starting a lesson on group psychology!
 

Doc4

Stumpy in cold weather
Staff member
The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!
 
I agree with this point of view (in a way), but I don't think I would have parked somewhere other than the designated parking space without having first obtained permission from the post office to do so. Even at the free standing post offices I use there is no designated area very close to the door where one can park and unload a lot of packages. Perhaps there should be but there isn't.

We could come up with a properly worded response by the old lady, too, couldn't we, in which she might explain that your rationalization for rule breaking failed to trump her right of passage?

Happy shaves,

Jim
Yes, of course we could Jim. But just so you know, you and I are seeing things differently. It is possible we might not be had I explained myself better, but that ship has sailed, so let me try now.

You view the script as my rationalization. I view the script as an explanation, made with the intent of paying attention to the lady, being solicitous enough to provide an opportunity for her to calm down and soften, while avoiding any mention of her own rude, demeaning, and counterproductive behavior. The point of all that is to create the possibility of the two of them talking politely and leaving on better terms.

I realize that my view is a minority one, at least in this thread, if not in general. Human nature encourages us to decide who has the better case. Some see the lady's public ridicule for the atrocious behavior that it was, view it as the overriding element of the interaction, and therefore advise telling her to flock off. Others see the OP's lack of respect and creative initiative as selfish and lazy, view it as overriding, and conclude that he deserved to be berated, or at least that he had it coming.

FWIW, I see two people who got hurt that day, two wrongs that didn't make a right, no one that left the scene a winner, let alone healed, and nothing worthwhile or lasting that got accomplished. A civil conversation could have done no worse.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 1034256


Our post office is in a strip shopping center where the cars in the shopping center drive right by the storefronts. Two very wide lanes for traffic separate the storefronts from the busy parking lot. Because I often have a tote bag of boxes to mail I double park right in front for a moment and then unload the boxes inside. Then hop back in the car and drive off - takes like one minute literally. Have been doing this for years now.

Yesterday as I am climbing back into the car a lady from behind me yells, "I love it when people think the parking rules don't apply to them." I turned around and looked at her. Frumpy, not looking like she is a generally happy person to begin with. And I replied to her, "You are welcome." Well, that triggered her big time and my car door closed as her voice was raising even higher. Drove off with a grin on my face, sorry to say but it is true.

So what would you say in such a situation?

~ The Captain


You did just fine young man. I wouldn't change a thing.
 

Chan Eil Whiskers

Fumbling about.
Yes, of course we could Jim. But just so you know, you and I are seeing things differently. It is possible we might not be had I explained myself better, but that ship has sailed, so let me try now.

You view the script as my rationalization. I view the script as an explanation, made with the intent of paying attention to the lady, being solicitous enough to provide an opportunity for her to calm down and soften, while avoiding any mention of her own rude, demeaning, and counterproductive behavior. The point of all that is to create the possibility of the two of them talking politely and leaving on better terms.

I realize that my view is a minority one, at least in this thread, if not in general. Human nature encourages us to decide who has the better case. Some see the lady's public ridicule for the atrocious behavior that it was, view it as the overriding element of the interaction, and therefore advise telling her to flock off. Others see the OP's lack of respect and creative initiative as selfish and lazy, view it as overriding, and conclude that he deserved to be berated, or at least that he had it coming.

FWIW, I see two people who got hurt that day, two wrongs that didn't make a right, no one that left the scene a winner, let alone healed, and nothing worthwhile or lasting that got accomplished. A civil conversation could have done no worse.

I see your point I think.

Happy shaves,

Jim
 
I'm more amazed that I'm not on your ignore list!
I ignore no one. I see everything.

1573842818571.png
 
Top Bottom