The Worst Thing In The World
So Eli was in the supermarket with Ms. Rabett, and the checkout clerk went, "Would you like to donate to our owner's favorite charity." Ms. Rabett knows that this is like asking Eli if he would like to say a nice word about Roger Pielke Jr., and quickly dragged the Bunny away before he could sweetly ask if the supermarket would care to match any donation he made.
In short, this is a cheap way for businesses to pretend they care while doing nothing and annoy Eli at the same time.
Posts
19 comments:
Don't you hate that!
Our local supermarket (small town) donates I think it's 1% of every checkout to a local work of the customer's choice. We can select from the list and the list is quite long. Everything from the community-built skate board park, to the local community radio, volunteer fire brigade, hospital, schools etc etc.
It all adds up, especially on holiday weekends with all the tourists and skiiers passing through. I like it.
I sense projection in this post.
Some businesses care, some do not, but Eli has his mind made up about all of them ahead of time. I nominate your attitude and your struggle to find good in others as the most annoying thing on Rabett Run, as you seem to find so very little of it in yourself.
1
Yeah, and don't you just hate those Salvation Army people ringing the bell outside the stores at Christmas?
...and the homeless guy on the corner asking for handouts?
There aughta be a law against all this stuff.
~@:>
I agree with Eli's sentiments. A colleague and I noticed the same "message" when eating at Jersey Mike's the other day. My soda cup advertised how Jersey Mike was able to raise $X for such-and-such charity but the way it was worded it was clear that Jersey Mike's did not do the donating with any of its cash. It was just taking credit for the cash donations from others. When I donate in response to the Salvation Army bell ringer's call, I take an inward credit not the public credit. When I donate offerings at my church, it is done in a sense of community from the seat in the church to the world at large. And I take an income tax credit. If owners of Jersey Mike's and the supermarket were true Samaritans there would be no advertising, "Oh, World! See the good I am doing with other people money."
Jersey Mike's those heartless bastards. Advertising their charitable collections only to fool the customers to come in on March 27, 2013 so all SALES from that day from EVERY Jersey Mike's location would be donated to charity.
They should not have told anyone as to keep sales down and save them money.
Just look at all the charities that received money.
http://www.jerseymikes.com/news/read.php?id=549#charities
This is an outrage.
1
Eli recommends that #1 take a reading class
If the company is donating its own money or proceeds, more power to them. If the company is matching what Eli donates, that's great too. If the company is asking Eli to donate and not matching or donating its own coin that sucks and the Rabett will have a word with the manager.
Sorry Eli I disagree, I have you read correctly.
You want to reduce and limit the outlets charities may have to collect donations.
So for example, a small business that collects for 5 charities, but only contributes to one or two, will have to remove the "collection plates" for the others else Eli will scold the manager.
I think it is time for you to retire and find a good home where you can rest your weary bones and brain.
Still cannot believe Jersey Mike's used their advertising muscle on charity contributions, man that is evil. Those charities must be mad as heck.
1
#1 your hallucinations are cause for alarm. Eli suggests that you simply donut to a charity of your choice.
i suppose i could read this and think you are a crotchety old man who dislikes when companies ask you to donate while not doing so themselves. and then conclude that you want this practice banned thereby limiting outlets for charities.
or i could read it and see that it annoys you that some companies aren't willing to put up their own money in addition to yours, which would increase the amount donated and do more for the charities.
either way i run the danger of projecting a preconceived notion about you. and i wouldn't want to project. because that would be wrong.
#3
How Prisoner of you #3.
What Eli wants is very simple, to shame the stores into actually donating something themselves.
So let us go through the scenario:
Cashier: Would you care to donate to our worthy cause (loudly so other customers can hear)?
Eli: What is the store giving?
Cashier: Crickets
Now Eli understands that the manager ordered the cashier to ask, and he often talks with the manager about this, but the entire point of this little play is to embarrass the customer into donating to something the store will take credit for. Screw that.
And Eli titles it "The Worst Thing in the World."
Talk about hallucinations.
What is like always thinking people have the worst possible intentions? Does it stroke your ego? Does it make you feel superior?
I think you should remove the word "not" from your mini Bio.
1
Dear 1,
I think you're right: Eli does title his rant "The Worst Thing in the World".
Your comment about hallucinations makes me wonder if you really believe that this title should be interpreted literally. Is this what you're saying?
Many thanks!
w
PS: Your comment about intentions makes me wonder. I'm not sure what exactly. It just makes me wonder.
Oh Willard you are such a bore.
My mention of "hallucinations" was as fun or serious as Eli's first mention of it.
I am sure there are many if not a majority of things in the world that make you wonder. It is when you share this wonderment with the world that I find such a bore.
1
Um, #1 , hyperbole?
Methinks your reaction is #2s...
1,
Thank you for your kind words.
Your "talk about hallucinations" was not serious.
Now, I'm not sure how to reconcile this funny remark with:
> What is like always thinking people have the worst possible intentions? Does it stroke your ego? Does it make you feel superior?
Now I now what to wonder about them: were these funny questions?
Funny, I thought they were just the usual way to divert the conversation about Eli.
Many thanks!
w
Willard,
No but the answers certainly will be.
Bill,
Methinks I do not care about your nonsensical response.
1
1,
Thank you for your candid answer. So your questions about Eli's psyche were serious, but your remark about his title was not.
Let's remind your serious questions:
> What is like always thinking people have the worst possible intentions? Does it stroke your ego? Does it make you feel superior?
You do seem to seriously presume that Eli thinks people have the worst possible intentions. I thought you were being hyperbolic.
***
Also I'm not sure how your questions are responsive to Eli's clarification:
> [T]he entire point of this little play is to embarrass the customer into donating to something the store will take credit for.
The possibility that the store might take credit for donations that are not theirs has already been observed. Take for instance:
> In light of the fact that the LCBO is precluded by legislation from making charitable contributions, assisting in campaigns like this helps the organization to give something back within the scope of our mandate.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/12/29/todays-letters-donating-at-the-check-out-hypocrisy-or-a-worthy-act/
I suppose Eli would mind less if he was presented such situation. Or perhaps not. Things can get quite complicated if we really are serious about this problem, and not merely using this blog post to question Eli's ego.
Only a troll would do that.
I trust you in being serious, because you said so, right?
***
You'll note that this letter I just quoted was in response to Jonathan's Kay **Dear retailers, please stop asking me if I want to make an extra donation for charity. It’s wrong, and it’s humiliating**:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/12/21/jonathan-kay-dear-retailers-please-stop-asking-me-if-i-want-to-make-an-extra-donation-for-charity-its-wrong-and-its-humiliating/
I think that Jonathan Kay, like Eli, do have a point.
Now, does that prompt serious questions about Jonathan Kay's ego?
Many thanks!
w
Willard,
A problem? Now people asking you a question is a problem that must be solved? How about, avoid people that will ask you questions that annoy you. There that was easy.
You are free to continue on your interpretation and labeling exercise on your own. I no longer wish to participate in your game.
1
1,
Thank you for your comment.
Perhaps there was a misunderstanding. What I referred as a problem was this:
> To embarrass the customer into donating to something the store will take credit for.
Jonathan Key's way to describe the problem is shown in the URL:
> asking-me-if-i-want-to-make-an-extra-donation-for-charity-its-wrong-and-its-humiliating
I think we can agree that both Eli and Jonathan Key consider this practice as being "problematic".
Hope this helps.
***
Now, your last comment does not show any concern about this problem.
Nor does the comment before that.
In fact, I don't think there's much else than your sarcastic comments.
The first is this one:
> You want to reduce and limit the outlets charities may have to collect donations.
which is a mindreading fail, besides being irrelevant, as the problem is not about charity outlets, but about the practice of asking for donations.
The second is this other one:
> Still cannot believe Jersey Mike's used their advertising muscle on charity contributions, man that is evil.
which is a dismissive minimization. Minimization is just a step behind another psychological process that we might not need to mention for now.
***
Now, will you stand up for your sarcasms, or you will just rejoice in provocation?
Many thanks!
w
Post a Comment