Current Events > Starbucks will close 8,000 US stores May 29 for racial-bias training

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Im_JustMe0129 04/17/18 3:44:31 PM #104:	Fucking idiots <cite>Im_JustMe0129 posted [p:899824914] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>Fucking idiots</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Coffeebeanz 04/17/18 3:45:25 PM #105:	CableZL posted... Coffeebeanz posted... Regardless of what the actual story was (or even which side was wrong), the court of public opinion has already ruined the manager's career aspirations forever. I call that much worse than whatever happened. Eh, that's a bit drastic as well. Unless her career aspirations were being a manager at Starbucks, then I'd say she'll be fine. Has her name even been made public? In this day and age, you can't garner this much publicity and not have some asshole dox you and post it on Twitter. When the internet mob is on you, it's already over. --- Physician [Internal Medicine] <cite>Coffeebeanz posted [p:899824973] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>CableZL posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coffeebeanz posted...</cite> <quote>Regardless of what the actual story was (or even which side was wrong), the court of public opinion has already ruined the manager's career aspirations forever. I call that much worse than whatever happened.</quote> Eh, that's a bit drastic as well. Unless her career aspirations were being a manager at Starbucks, then I'd say she'll be fine. Has her name even been made public?</quote> In this day and age, you can't garner this much publicity and not have some asshole dox you and post it on Twitter. When the internet mob is on you, it's already over.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
mario2000 04/17/18 3:46:26 PM #106:	man some ppl itt are rly mad about a company deciding to close itself for one whole day to improve itself --- Arrrr the SS Goku, Mighty fine boat... -fatmatt Hope Frieza doesn't chuck an Iceberg at the Goku, otherwise it's all over. -Nekoslash <cite>mario2000 posted [p:899825035] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>man some ppl itt are rly mad about a company deciding to close itself for one whole day to improve itself</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tactrix 04/17/18 3:46:43 PM #107:	So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to? --- http://i.imgur.com/nDQGp40.gifv <cite>Tactrix posted [p:899825051] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 3:47:27 PM #108:	UnfairRepresent posted... hockeybub89 posted... which isn't even accurate because people of all walks of life "trespass" at places like Starbucks everyday without incident. This was just 1 employee that apparently was scared of two black people. So she was so scared of black people that despite her establishment being full of black people and presumably full of black people every day up until this incident decided that these two black people where the blackest and peoplest of them all and so was racist towards them for literally no reason. Your own argument shifts towards this not being racially motivated. The manager (before she was harrased) made it clear that she never even wanted the to be arrested and flat out refused to press charges. Which further dents the "she is racist" theory 2 guys refused to buy anything and refused to leave while demanding to use tables and toilets. So they were asked to leave. There is nothing unreasonable about that or even that bizarre. When I first heard the story I was waiting for the hook when suddenly something crazy happened and by the end I was "Wha.... that's it?" I imagine there could have been another motivator, but what else could have made these two guys stand out to her? Did she know them? Is there a cover up hiding bad shit they were doing. I don't want to call it racist either because I'm sure black people have "trespassed" at many a Starbucks without incident. I'd love to know more about this employee and how many times this Starbucks had called the cops to remove loiterers. Racism is an easy culprit for stupidity, but it is indeed lazy for me to assume it without more info. Humans constantly find reasons to do stupid shit. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899825096] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote>which isn't even accurate because people of all walks of life "trespass" at places like Starbucks everyday without incident. This was just 1 employee that apparently was scared of two black people.</quote> So she was so scared of black people that despite her establishment being full of black people and presumably full of black people every day up until this incident decided that these two black people where the blackest and peoplest of them all and so was racist towards them for literally no reason. Your own argument shifts towards this not being racially motivated. The manager (before she was harrased) made it clear that she never even wanted the to be arrested and flat out refused to press charges. Which further dents the "she is racist" theory 2 guys refused to buy anything and refused to leave while demanding to use tables and toilets. So they were asked to leave. There is nothing unreasonable about that or even that bizarre. When I first heard the story I was waiting for the hook when suddenly something crazy happened and by the end I was "Wha.... that's it?"</quote> I imagine there could have been another motivator, but what else could have made these two guys stand out to her? Did she know them? Is there a cover up hiding bad shit they were doing. I don't want to call it racist either because I'm sure black people have "trespassed" at many a Starbucks without incident. I'd love to know more about this employee and how many times this Starbucks had called the cops to remove loiterers. Racism is an easy culprit for stupidity, but it is indeed lazy for me to assume it without more info. Humans constantly find reasons to do stupid shit.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SpreadManning 04/17/18 3:47:36 PM #109:	lmfao <cite>SpreadManning posted [p:899825107] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>lmfao</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 04/17/18 3:47:37 PM #110:	Coffeebeanz posted... In this day and age, you can't garner this much publicity and not have some a**** dox you and post it on Twitter. When the internet mob is on you, it's already over. That typically happens when some bit of info about the individual is made public, though, like her name. And again, unless being a manager at Starbucks was what her career aspirations were, then she's gonna be fine. --- http://i.imgur.com/ByKGlJb.gif http://i.imgur.com/nZdaA8D.gif http://i.imgur.com/VBLBILg.jpg <cite>CableZL posted [p:899825109] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Coffeebeanz posted...</cite> <quote>In this day and age, you can't garner this much publicity and not have some a**** dox you and post it on Twitter. When the internet mob is on you, it's already over.</quote> That typically happens when some bit of info about the individual is made public, though, like her name. And again, unless being a manager at Starbucks was what her career aspirations were, then she's gonna be fine.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 3:47:40 PM #111:	hockeybub89 posted... And why are most people not forced by police to leave when "loitering"? Because people very very very very very very very very very very rarely are stupid enough to refuse to leave private property when asked repeatedly until the police are called on them. I've been in this situation myself. When asked to leave private property I have never thought "No fuck you I refuse I'm going to sit here and refuse to leave lol" and I can't comprehend why anyone would. You seem to forget that the need to call the police came from the esclation of the guys refusing to leave. Not the other way round. hockeybub89 posted... Why is an employee concerned about criminals breaking the law only call the cops on these 2 men while others do the same? Exactly. This pretty clearly demonstrates that others were not doing the same. It's also irrelevant. hockeybub89 posted... Also, has there been any proof that these men were confronted multiple times by the staff before the cops were called? Yes. It's in the literal articles people mad at Starbucks are posting routinely. The police were only called because the guys refused to leave or buy anything hockeybub89 posted... I've been in many a place like Starbucks and not been arrested for not purchasing Cool. have you ever been asked to leave and repeatedly refused? And he was never seen again --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899825111] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> And why are most people not forced by police to leave when "loitering"?</quote> Because people very very very very very very very very very very rarely are stupid enough to refuse to leave private property when asked repeatedly until the police are called on them. I've been in this situation myself. When asked to leave private property I have never thought "No fuck you I refuse I'm going to sit here and refuse to leave lol" and I can't comprehend why anyone would. You seem to forget that the need to call the police came from the esclation of the guys refusing to leave. Not the other way round. <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why is an employee concerned about criminals breaking the law only call the cops on these 2 men while others do the same?</quote> Exactly. This pretty clearly demonstrates that others were not doing the same. It's also irrelevant. <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Also, has there been any proof that these men were confronted multiple times by the staff before the cops were called?</quote> Yes. It's in the literal articles people mad at Starbucks are posting routinely. The police were only called because the guys refused to leave or buy anything <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> I've been in many a place like Starbucks and not been arrested for not purchasing</quote> Cool. have you ever been asked to leave and repeatedly refused? And he was never seen again</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 3:49:19 PM #112:	UnfairRepresent posted... Coffeebeanz posted... Regardless of what the actual story was (or even which side was wrong), the court of public opinion has already ruined the manager's career aspirations forever. I call that much worse than whatever happened. I gotta agree with this. The people harrasing her and the fact she was forced to step down is really tragic Making your company look bad by getting people arrested for doing something that Starbucks allows is not a good look for your future with Starbucks. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899825239] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Coffeebeanz posted...</cite> <quote>Regardless of what the actual story was (or even which side was wrong), the court of public opinion has already ruined the manager's career aspirations forever. I call that much worse than whatever happened.</quote> I gotta agree with this. The people harrasing her and the fact she was forced to step down is really tragic</quote> Making your company look bad by getting people arrested for doing something that Starbucks allows is not a good look for your future with Starbucks.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 04/17/18 3:49:20 PM #113:	As long as their pokestops still work, I don't care... and even then I only pass by 1 of them. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:899825240] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>As long as their pokestops still work, I don't care... and even then I only pass by 1 of them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
FrisbeeDude 04/17/18 3:51:32 PM #114:	Alucard188 posted... Amazing that they have to close down for an entire day to teach people to treat everyone equally, and not project your prejudices on them. For black people, it isn't that amazing. Pretty much business as usual --- If you're not voting like a black woman, your opinion doesn't matter to me <cite>FrisbeeDude posted [p:899825365] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Alucard188 posted...</cite> <quote>Amazing that they have to close down for an entire day to teach people to treat everyone equally, and not project your prejudices on them.</quote> For black people, it isn't that amazing. Pretty much business as usual</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 3:53:17 PM #115:	hockeybub89 posted... Making your company look bad by getting people arrested for doing something that Starbucks allows is not a good look for your future with Starbucks. For sure, it's hard to blame Starbucks for wanting the PR but when "making your company look bad" is because people are outraged over nothing, you still feel bad for the victim. It would be like if everyone got mad at your work because you wore a purple shirt and so they forced you to leave for "making them look bad.". Can't really blame them but I'd still think it's tragic that you're suffering over nothing because people want to be mad. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899825460] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Making your company look bad by getting people arrested for doing something that Starbucks allows is not a good look for your future with Starbucks.</quote> For sure, it's hard to blame Starbucks for wanting the PR but when "making your company look bad" is because people are outraged over nothing, you still feel bad for the victim. It would be like if everyone got mad at your work because you wore a purple shirt and so they forced you to leave for "making them look bad.". Can't really blame them but I'd still think it's tragic that you're suffering over nothing because people want to be mad.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 3:59:57 PM #116:	UnfairRepresent posted... Cool. have you ever been asked to leave and repeatedly refused? And he was never seen again No, which is why I am very confused about this incident. You're giving me questions, not answers. Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? Why were the cops called in them? What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"? If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be? Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899825870] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote>Cool. have you ever been asked to leave and repeatedly refused? And he was never seen again</quote> No, which is why I am very confused about this incident. You're giving me questions, not answers. Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? Why were the cops called in them? What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"? If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be? Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 4:05:39 PM #117:	hockeybub89 posted... No, which is why I am very confused about this incident. You shouldn't be. hockeybub89 posted... Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? Because they refused to buy anything or leave. Why were the cops called in them? Because they repeatedly refused to leave or buy anything when the staff asked. What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"? They refused to leave or buy anything when asked by staff and cops. If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be? Because no one else who was asked to leave refused repeatedly. Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason had it in for them so much that she didn't want them to be arrested and didn't press charges. She just solely politely wanted them to leave or buy something. Hmmmmm --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899826180] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> No, which is why I am very confused about this incident.</quote> You shouldn't be. <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? </quote> Because they refused to buy anything or leave. <quote>Why were the cops called in them?</quote> Because they repeatedly refused to leave or buy anything when the staff asked. <quote> What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"?</quote> They refused to leave or buy anything when asked by staff and cops. <quote> If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be?</quote> Because no one else who was asked to leave refused repeatedly. <quote> Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason</quote> had it in for them so much that she didn't want them to be arrested and didn't press charges. She just solely politely wanted them to leave or buy something. Hmmmmm</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
A_Good_Boy 04/17/18 4:06:20 PM #118:	Tactrix posted... So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to? It's not like this is the 1st time Starbucks has closed down every single one of their stores so they could re-train their employees. They just love this sort of PR. --- Who is? I am! <cite>A_Good_Boy posted [p:899826220] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tactrix posted...</cite> <quote>So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to?</quote> It's not like this is the 1st time Starbucks has closed down every single one of their stores so they could re-train their employees. They just love this sort of PR.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
goldenBoi45 04/17/18 4:09:10 PM #119:	The Admiral posted... Those are always a waste of time, but hopefully it will shut people up about the 2 men in Philly. Why do you want to shut them up so much? You seriously get so triggered by these types of things lol --- Getting girls is all about honesty. If you can fake that, you're in! <cite>goldenBoi45 posted [p:899826373] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>The Admiral posted...</cite> <quote>Those are always a waste of time, but hopefully it will shut people up about the 2 men in Philly.</quote> Why do you want to shut them up so much? You seriously get so triggered by these types of things lol</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 4:15:11 PM #120:	Tactrix posted... So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to? PR. That's really what this is. to show "We're doing something!" and get people talking about them in positive lights --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899826724] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tactrix posted...</cite> <quote>So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to?</quote> PR. That's really what this is. to show "We're doing something!" and get people talking about them in positive lights</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 4:17:03 PM #121:	goldenBoi45 posted... Why do you want to shut them up so much? You seriously get so triggered by these types of things lol A girl lost her job to harrasment, and now people will have less access to delicious drinks due to this. And "this" is stupid. It's easy to see why it bothers people. Imagine this was your daughter and she comes home one day and says "I lost my job because two guys broke the law and I didn't press charges on them because I'm so nice." People seem to forget that in their anger, that the person they're irrationally angry at is also a person. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899826827] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>goldenBoi45 posted...</cite> <quote> Why do you want to shut them up so much? You seriously get so triggered by these types of things lol</quote> A girl lost her job to harrasment, and now people will have less access to delicious drinks due to this. And "this" is stupid. It's easy to see why it bothers people. Imagine this was your daughter and she comes home one day and says "I lost my job because two guys broke the law and I didn't press charges on them because I'm so nice." People seem to forget that in their anger, that the person they're irrationally angry at is also a person.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
lightwarrior78 04/17/18 4:19:44 PM #122:	Tactrix posted... So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to? Optics for a world of idiots that don't see this as one isolated incident, and probably don't even really want to. She lost her job, and that should be the end of it, but that's not enough for some people. --- http://backloggery.com/reddthesock <cite>lightwarrior78 posted [p:899826969] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tactrix posted...</cite> <quote>So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to?</quote> Optics for a world of idiots that don't see this as one isolated incident, and probably don't even really want to. She lost her job, and that should be the end of it, but that's not enough for some people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 04/17/18 4:20:32 PM #123:	Tactrix posted... So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to? There has been another alleged incident since that one happened, and Starbucks is trying to cover their bases. --- http://i.imgur.com/ByKGlJb.gif http://i.imgur.com/nZdaA8D.gif http://i.imgur.com/VBLBILg.jpg <cite>CableZL posted [p:899827020] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Tactrix posted...</cite> <quote>So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to?</quote> There has been another alleged incident since that one happened, and Starbucks is trying to cover their bases.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 04/17/18 4:21:01 PM #124:	lightwarrior78 posted... Tactrix posted... So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to? Optics for a world of idiots that don't see this as one isolated incident, and probably don't even really want to. She lost her job, and that should be the end of it, but that's not enough for some people. CableZL posted... There has been another alleged incident since that one happened, and Starbucks is trying to cover their bases. --- http://i.imgur.com/ByKGlJb.gif http://i.imgur.com/nZdaA8D.gif http://i.imgur.com/VBLBILg.jpg <cite>CableZL posted [p:899827054] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>lightwarrior78 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Tactrix posted...</cite> <quote>So my question is, why close 8,000 stores down for a day for something that happened in ONE? I mean, shouldn't that one store be the one that actually has a talking to?</quote> Optics for a world of idiots that don't see this as one isolated incident, and probably don't even really want to. She lost her job, and that should be the end of it, but that's not enough for some people.</quote> <cite>CableZL posted...</cite> <quote>There has been another alleged incident since that one happened, and Starbucks is trying to cover their bases. </quote></quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Muffinz0rz 04/17/18 4:21:30 PM #125:	125 posts in an hour impressive --- Not removing this until Pat Benatar is in Super Smash Bros. (Started 8/31/2010) 2018 NFLB Summersim (1-3): https://i.imgur.com/7cjNtgQ.png <cite>Muffinz0rz posted [p:899827086] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>125 posts in an hour impressive</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 04/17/18 4:22:45 PM #126:	Apparently the other incident happened BEFORE the incident with the two black dudes, but didn't get any traction until that happened. --- http://i.imgur.com/ByKGlJb.gif http://i.imgur.com/nZdaA8D.gif http://i.imgur.com/VBLBILg.jpg <cite>CableZL posted [p:899827155] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>Apparently the other incident happened BEFORE the incident with the two black dudes, but didn't get any traction until that happened.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Kolibri X 04/17/18 4:30:19 PM #127:	Watching Starbucks eat shit over this has been hilarious. Instead of hiring those 10,000 refugees like they wanted maybe they should hire 10,000 black people. --- Platinum GameFAQs Member http://i.imgur.com/VgwI8qO.gif <cite>Kolibri X posted [p:899827561] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>Watching Starbucks eat shit over this has been hilarious. Instead of hiring those 10,000 refugees like they wanted maybe they should hire 10,000 black people.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 04/17/18 4:36:51 PM #128:	UnfairRepresent posted... hockeybub89 posted... No, which is why I am very confused about this incident. You shouldn't be. hockeybub89 posted... Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? Because they refused to buy anything or leave. Why were the cops called in them? Because they repeatedly refused to leave or buy anything when the staff asked. What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"? They refused to leave or buy anything when asked by staff and cops. If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be? Because no one else who was asked to leave refused repeatedly. Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason had it in for them so much that she didn't want them to be arrested and didn't press charges. She just solely politely wanted them to leave or buy something. Hmmmmm "They were asked to leave because they didn't leave when asked to leave." The first time they were asked to leave, was it because they were previously asked to leave? How did the employees know they would never buy anything before asking them to leave the first time? Where is the proof that the men stated "we won't buy anything even when our friend arrives," which literally no one has been able to produce in any of the topics. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:899827973] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> No, which is why I am very confused about this incident.</quote> You shouldn't be. <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? </quote> Because they refused to buy anything or leave. <quote>Why were the cops called in them?</quote> Because they repeatedly refused to leave or buy anything when the staff asked. <quote> What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"?</quote> They refused to leave or buy anything when asked by staff and cops. <quote> If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be?</quote> Because no one else who was asked to leave refused repeatedly. <quote> Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason</quote> had it in for them so much that she didn't want them to be arrested and didn't press charges. She just solely politely wanted them to leave or buy something. Hmmmmm</quote> "They were asked to leave because they didn't leave when asked to leave." The first time they were asked to leave, was it because they were previously asked to leave? How did the employees know they would never buy anything before asking them to leave the first time? Where is the proof that the men stated "we won't buy anything even when our friend arrives," which literally no one has been able to produce in any of the topics.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 04/17/18 4:38:21 PM #129:	UnfairRepresent posted... goldenBoi45 posted... Why do you want to shut them up so much? You seriously get so triggered by these types of things lol A girl lost her job to harrasment, and now people will have less access to delicious drinks due to this. And "this" is stupid. It's easy to see why it bothers people. Imagine this was your daughter and she comes home one day and says "I lost my job because two guys broke the law and I didn't press charges on them because I'm so nice." People seem to forget that in their anger, that the person they're irrationally angry at is also a person. You have completely abandoned trying not to sound disingenuous at this point. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:899828087] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>goldenBoi45 posted...</cite> <quote> Why do you want to shut them up so much? You seriously get so triggered by these types of things lol</quote> A girl lost her job to harrasment, and now people will have less access to delicious drinks due to this. And "this" is stupid. It's easy to see why it bothers people. Imagine this was your daughter and she comes home one day and says "I lost my job because two guys broke the law and I didn't press charges on them because I'm so nice." People seem to forget that in their anger, that the person they're irrationally angry at is also a person.</quote> You have completely abandoned trying not to sound disingenuous at this point.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 4:49:09 PM #130:	I find it interesting that every time people make points and arguments you have no counter for, you respond with insults and handwaves and think that's acceptable. It just demonstrates that you have no real rebuttal, just anger. ImTheMacheteGuy posted... "They were asked to leave because they didn't leave when asked to leave." Yes. The police were only called because they refused to leave. ImTheMacheteGuy posted... The first time they were asked to leave, was it because they were previously asked to leave? How did the employees know they would never buy anything before asking them to leave the first time? Where is the proof that the men stated "we won't buy anything even when our friend arrives," which literally no one has been able to produce in any of the topics. It doesn't matter. They could leave then come back later if that's the case or buy 1 drink while waiting for their friend. They refused. They refused to leave or buy anything. Going "Potentially maybe they might have bought something at some time" is silly. A homeless man could live in Starbucks for 15 years sleeping there overnight and say "I was going to buy something later." When you're asked to leave, you leave. It's private property. They are under no oglibation to home you and you are trespassing if you refuse to leave private property when the police and relevant staff/oweners of said property ask you to do so repeatedly. If the manager has pressed charges instead of being kind the two lads would still be in jail right now. You're literally arguing that when staff and police ask you to leave private property, if it's okay to refuse (at least if you are black) I find that bizarre. I look back at the times I've been asked to leave places and can't imagine any reason why I would think of refusing to do so. Even to literal cops. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899828740] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>I find it interesting that every time people make points and arguments you have no counter for, you respond with insults and handwaves and think that's acceptable. It just demonstrates that you have no real rebuttal, just anger. <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> "They were asked to leave because they didn't leave when asked to leave."</quote> Yes. The police were only called because they refused to leave. <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> The first time they were asked to leave, was it because they were previously asked to leave? How did the employees know they would never buy anything before asking them to leave the first time? Where is the proof that the men stated "we won't buy anything even when our friend arrives," which literally no one has been able to produce in any of the topics.</quote> It doesn't matter. They could leave then come back later if that's the case or buy 1 drink while waiting for their friend. They refused. They refused to leave or buy anything. Going "Potentially maybe they might have bought something at some time" is silly. A homeless man could live in Starbucks for 15 years sleeping there overnight and say "I was going to buy something later." When you're asked to leave, you leave. It's private property. They are under no oglibation to home you and you are trespassing if you refuse to leave private property when the police and relevant staff/oweners of said property ask you to do so repeatedly. If the manager has pressed charges instead of being kind the two lads would still be in jail right now. You're literally arguing that when staff and police ask you to leave private property, if it's okay to refuse (at least if you are black) I find that bizarre. I look back at the times I've been asked to leave places and can't imagine any reason why I would think of refusing to do so. Even to literal cops.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Tactrix 04/17/18 4:54:13 PM #131:	Thanks to those that responded. It seems over the top to me, but I guess I can understand from a PR standpoint, and especially if there's actually been more than one similar incident. --- http://i.imgur.com/nDQGp40.gifv <cite>Tactrix posted [p:899829014] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>Thanks to those that responded. It seems over the top to me, but I guess I can understand from a PR standpoint, and especially if there's actually been more than one similar incident.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
LightningAce11 04/17/18 4:55:20 PM #132:	All this over the stupidity of one manager. Oh well. I don't think people went in starbucks for the drinks anyway. Yucky overpriced stuff. --- "I'm an atheist too but still believe in hell. That's where you're headed pal." - Mr_Karate_II <cite>LightningAce11 posted [p:899829071] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>All this over the stupidity of one manager. Oh well. I don't think people went in starbucks for the drinks anyway. Yucky overpriced stuff.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
CableZL 04/17/18 4:55:58 PM #133:	LightningAce11 posted... All this over the stupidity of one manager. Oh well. I don't think people went in starbucks for the drinks anyway. Yucky overpriced stuff. It's not just the one manager. There was another alleged incident that happened before that, too, but it didn't get much traction relatively until after this one. --- http://i.imgur.com/ByKGlJb.gif http://i.imgur.com/nZdaA8D.gif http://i.imgur.com/VBLBILg.jpg <cite>CableZL posted [p:899829099] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>LightningAce11 posted...</cite> <quote>All this over the stupidity of one manager. Oh well. I don't think people went in starbucks for the drinks anyway. Yucky overpriced stuff.</quote> It's not just the one manager. There was another alleged incident that happened before that, too, but it didn't get much traction relatively until after this one.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SageHarpuia 04/17/18 4:57:05 PM #134:	This is totally warranted and a good use of time and resources. --- "You will pay dearly for your futile resistance!" <cite>SageHarpuia posted [p:899829164] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>This is totally warranted and a good use of time and resources.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Irony 04/17/18 4:58:08 PM #135:	This is a weird publicity stunt. --- I am Mogar, God of Irony and The Devourer of Topics. http://i.imgtc.com/tHc3mIo.png http://i.imgtc.com/PYxw8Lm.png <cite>Irony posted [p:899829234] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>This is a weird publicity stunt.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
karlpilkington4 04/17/18 5:00:43 PM #136:	Not sure if this was posted, but here is a video of the other incident. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/04/16/black-man-videotapes-starbucks-refusal-let-him-use-restroom/521233002/ The video, posted to Twitter by activist Shaun King, purports to show an African-American man identified as Brandon Ward in a Torrance, Calif., store asking why he was denied access to the store's restroom when a white customer was granted access. Here we go again. Meet Brandon Ward. He was @Starbucks - about to make a purchase - and needed to use the restroom. They denied him the code. He then finds a white man, Weston, who came out of the restroom. He had not made a purchase but they gave HIM the code. --- Is this the Krusty Krab? No this is Patrick!! <cite>karlpilkington4 posted [p:899829395] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>Not sure if this was posted, but here is a video of the other incident. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/04/16/black-man-videotapes-starbucks-refusal-let-him-use-restroom/521233002/ The video, posted to Twitter by activist Shaun King, purports to show an African-American man identified as Brandon Ward in a Torrance, Calif., store asking why he was denied access to the store's restroom when a white customer was granted access. Here we go again. Meet Brandon Ward. He was @Starbucks - about to make a purchase - and needed to use the restroom. They denied him the code. He then finds a white man, Weston, who came out of the restroom. He had not made a purchase but they gave HIM the code. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 04/17/18 5:01:56 PM #137:	UnfairRepresent posted... I find it interesting that every time people make points and arguments you have no counter for, you respond with insults and handwaves and think that's acceptable. It just demonstrates that you have no real rebuttal, just anger. ImTheMacheteGuy posted... "They were asked to leave because they didn't leave when asked to leave." Yes. The police were only called because they refused to leave. ImTheMacheteGuy posted... The first time they were asked to leave, was it because they were previously asked to leave? How did the employees know they would never buy anything before asking them to leave the first time? Where is the proof that the men stated "we won't buy anything even when our friend arrives," which literally no one has been able to produce in any of the topics. It doesn't matter. They could leave then come back later if that's the case or buy 1 drink while waiting for their friend. They refused. They refused to leave or buy anything. Going "Potentially maybe they might have bought something at some time" is silly. A homeless man could live in Starbucks for 15 years sleeping there overnight and say "I was going to buy something later." When you're asked to leave, you leave. It's private property. They are under no oglibation to home you and you are trespassing if you refuse to leave private property when the police and relevant staff/oweners of said property ask you to do so repeatedly. If the manager has pressed charges instead of being kind the two lads would still be in jail right now. You're literally arguing that when staff and police ask you to leave private property, if it's okay to refuse (at least if you are black) I find that bizarre. I look back at the times I've been asked to leave places and can't imagine any reason why I would think of refusing to do so. Even to literal cops. "Proof that they were indeed loitering, would would confirm that were trespassing when the cops got involved... doesnt matter." Do you know what actually doesn't matter? Do you know what is actually not relevant? Your asinine homeless man 15 years scenario. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:899829460] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote>I find it interesting that every time people make points and arguments you have no counter for, you respond with insults and handwaves and think that's acceptable. It just demonstrates that you have no real rebuttal, just anger. <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> "They were asked to leave because they didn't leave when asked to leave."</quote> Yes. The police were only called because they refused to leave. <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> The first time they were asked to leave, was it because they were previously asked to leave? How did the employees know they would never buy anything before asking them to leave the first time? Where is the proof that the men stated "we won't buy anything even when our friend arrives," which literally no one has been able to produce in any of the topics.</quote> It doesn't matter. They could leave then come back later if that's the case or buy 1 drink while waiting for their friend. They refused. They refused to leave or buy anything. Going "Potentially maybe they might have bought something at some time" is silly. A homeless man could live in Starbucks for 15 years sleeping there overnight and say "I was going to buy something later." When you're asked to leave, you leave. It's private property. They are under no oglibation to home you and you are trespassing if you refuse to leave private property when the police and relevant staff/oweners of said property ask you to do so repeatedly. If the manager has pressed charges instead of being kind the two lads would still be in jail right now. You're literally arguing that when staff and police ask you to leave private property, if it's okay to refuse (at least if you are black) I find that bizarre. I look back at the times I've been asked to leave places and can't imagine any reason why I would think of refusing to do so. Even to literal cops.</quote> "Proof that they were indeed loitering, would would confirm that were trespassing when the cops got involved... doesnt matter." Do you know what actually doesn't matter? Do you know what is actually not relevant? Your asinine homeless man 15 years scenario.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 04/17/18 5:02:50 PM #138:	karlpilkington4 posted... Not sure if this was posted, but here is a video of the other incident. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/04/16/black-man-videotapes-starbucks-refusal-let-him-use-restroom/521233002/ The video, posted to Twitter by activist Shaun King, purports to show an African-American man identified as Brandon Ward in a Torrance, Calif., store asking why he was denied access to the store's restroom when a white customer was granted access. Here we go again. Meet Brandon Ward. He was @Starbucks - about to make a purchase - and needed to use the restroom. They denied him the code. He then finds a white man, Weston, who came out of the restroom. He had not made a purchase but they gave HIM the code. I like your username --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:899829507] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>karlpilkington4 posted...</cite> <quote>Not sure if this was posted, but here is a video of the other incident. https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/04/16/black-man-videotapes-starbucks-refusal-let-him-use-restroom/521233002/ The video, posted to Twitter by activist Shaun King, purports to show an African-American man identified as Brandon Ward in a Torrance, Calif., store asking why he was denied access to the store's restroom when a white customer was granted access. Here we go again. Meet Brandon Ward. He was @Starbucks - about to make a purchase - and needed to use the restroom. They denied him the code. He then finds a white man, Weston, who came out of the restroom. He had not made a purchase but they gave HIM the code. </quote> I like your username</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Muffinz0rz 04/17/18 5:03:10 PM #139:	karlpilkington4 posted... activist Shaun King sigh --- Not removing this until Pat Benatar is in Super Smash Bros. (Started 8/31/2010) 2018 NFLB Summersim (1-3): https://i.imgur.com/7cjNtgQ.png <cite>Muffinz0rz posted [p:899829530] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>karlpilkington4 posted...</cite> <quote>activist Shaun King</quote> sigh</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Crazyman93 04/17/18 5:03:20 PM #140:	May 30th in the news: Dunkin Donuts reports record profits for May 29th. --- let's lubricate friction material! ~nickels, Cars & Trucks <cite>Crazyman93 posted [p:899829542] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>May 30th in the news: Dunkin Donuts reports record profits for May 29th.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 5:05:11 PM #141:	UnfairRepresent posted... hockeybub89 posted... No, which is why I am very confused about this incident. You shouldn't be. hockeybub89 posted... Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? Because they refused to buy anything or leave. Why were the cops called in them? Because they repeatedly refused to leave or buy anything when the staff asked. What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"? They refused to leave or buy anything when asked by staff and cops. If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be? Because no one else who was asked to leave refused repeatedly. Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason had it in for them so much that she didn't want them to be arrested and didn't press charges. She just solely politely wanted them to leave or buy something. Hmmmmm But why were they asked to leave? Why were being required to purchase something? Why were the cops called? What made these two men different than anyone else that hangs out at a Starbucks without a purchase? Forget about irrelevant. This is the only thing that is relevant. I think I'm going to open a Starbucks, allow people to hang out in it all the time like my parent company allows, and then one day pick out 2 guys doing that as illegal loiterers that I must kick out? Who cares if that is inconsistent with my typical policy? I own a business and can make shit up as I go. What's stopping me? Discrimination law? Pssssh --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899829651] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> No, which is why I am very confused about this incident.</quote> You shouldn't be. <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why did these guys even get (allegedly) asked to leave? </quote> Because they refused to buy anything or leave. <quote>Why were the cops called in them?</quote> Because they repeatedly refused to leave or buy anything when the staff asked. <quote> What made them unique compared to your average Starbucks "trespasser"?</quote> They refused to leave or buy anything when asked by staff and cops. <quote> If everyone that hangs out at Starbucks is not called a loiterer and arrested, then how can anyone be?</quote> Because no one else who was asked to leave refused repeatedly. <quote> Either they were doing something worse that no one wants to reveal for some reason, or this women had it out for these guys for some reason</quote> had it in for them so much that she didn't want them to be arrested and didn't press charges. She just solely politely wanted them to leave or buy something. Hmmmmm</quote> But why were they asked to leave? Why were being required to purchase something? Why were the cops called? What made these two men different than anyone else that hangs out at a Starbucks without a purchase? Forget about irrelevant. This is the only thing that is relevant. I think I'm going to open a Starbucks, allow people to hang out in it all the time like my parent company allows, and then one day pick out 2 guys doing that as illegal loiterers that I must kick out? Who cares if that is inconsistent with my typical policy? I own a business and can make shit up as I go. What's stopping me? Discrimination law? Pssssh</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 5:06:34 PM #142:	ImTheMacheteGuy posted... "Proof that they were indeed loitering, would would confirm that were trespassing when the cops got involved... doesnt matter." Would would indeed. They were refusing to leave, refusing to buy anything and using the facilities. Once they refused to leave to staff and police, they were trespassing. You're literally arguing that it's okay to refuse to leave private property despite cops and relevant authorities repeately asking you to leave... It's silly. Do you know what actually doesn't matter? Do you know what is actually not relevant? Your asinine homeless man 15 years scenario. That was in relation to your defense "It's okay to ignore cops and staff and refuse to leave or buy anything so long as you claim that eventually at some time in history you would buy something." Which is a silly defense and you know it, which is why you're now pretending you never said it --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899829718] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> "Proof that they were indeed loitering, would would confirm that were trespassing when the cops got involved... doesnt matter."</quote> Would would indeed. They were refusing to leave, refusing to buy anything and using the facilities. Once they refused to leave to staff and police, they were trespassing. You're literally arguing that it's okay to refuse to leave private property despite cops and relevant authorities repeately asking you to leave... It's silly. <quote>Do you know what actually doesn't matter? Do you know what is actually not relevant? Your asinine homeless man 15 years scenario.</quote> That was in relation to your defense "It's okay to ignore cops and staff and refuse to leave or buy anything so long as you claim that eventually at some time in history you would buy something." Which is a silly defense and you know it, which is why you're now pretending you never said it</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Crazyman93 04/17/18 5:10:23 PM #143:	hockeybub89 posted... Why were being required to purchase something? Because they were taking up space that could be reserved for paying customers. How difficult is that to understand? --- let's lubricate friction material! ~nickels, Cars & Trucks <cite>Crazyman93 posted [p:899829957] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why were being required to purchase something?</quote> Because they were taking up space that could be reserved for paying customers. How difficult is that to understand?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 5:10:49 PM #144:	hockeybub89 posted... But why were they asked to leave? Because they refused to buy anything and were using facilities while irritating staff. Why were being required to purchase something? Because that would justify them refusing to leave. Why were the cops called? Because they refused to leave when asked by staff and so were breaking the law. What made these two men different than anyone else that hangs out at a Starbucks without a purchase? The fact that they refused to leave when asked to by staff and Police. That's literally it I think I'm going to open a Starbucks, allow people to hang out in it all the time like my parent company allows, and then one day pick out 2 guys doing that as illegal loiterers that I must kick out? Who cares if that is inconsistent with my typical policy? I own a business and can make shit up as I go. What's stopping me? Discrimination law? Pssssh People get asked to leave private property all the time dude. This is only strange because the guys just said no and demanded to stay for unknown reasons. You're blaming the staff and police for picking on guys when in reality the guys were just acting so unusual that they stuck out. Who refuses to leave private property when asked by staff and cops? And also refuses to purchase anything? Their refusal to leave is literally the only reason they were arrested. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899829986] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> But why were they asked to leave?</quote> Because they refused to buy anything and were using facilities while irritating staff. <quote>Why were being required to purchase something?</quote> Because that would justify them refusing to leave. <quote>Why were the cops called? </quote> Because they refused to leave when asked by staff and so were breaking the law. <quote> What made these two men different than anyone else that hangs out at a Starbucks without a purchase?</quote> The fact that they refused to leave when asked to by staff and Police. That's literally it <quote>I think I'm going to open a Starbucks, allow people to hang out in it all the time like my parent company allows, and then one day pick out 2 guys doing that as illegal loiterers that I must kick out? Who cares if that is inconsistent with my typical policy? I own a business and can make shit up as I go. What's stopping me? Discrimination law? Pssssh</quote> People get asked to leave private property all the time dude. This is only strange because the guys just said no and demanded to stay for unknown reasons. You're blaming the staff and police for picking on guys when in reality the guys were just acting so unusual that they stuck out. Who refuses to leave private property when asked by staff and cops? And also refuses to purchase anything? Their refusal to leave is literally the only reason they were arrested.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 5:11:08 PM #145:	UnfairRepresent posted... That was in relation to your defense "It's okay to ignore cops and staff and refuse to leave or buy anything so long as you claim that eventually at some time in history you would buy something." Which is a silly defense and you know it, which is why you're now pretending you never said it You know what is a good defense? Pointing to someone else and going "Why didn't you call the cops on this guy?" I hope these guys sue Starbucks and win. Racial or not, they were somehow discriminated against given other "loiterers" in that specific store at that time and the general Starbucks attitude towards being a hangout. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899830003] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote>That was in relation to your defense "It's okay to ignore cops and staff and refuse to leave or buy anything so long as you claim that eventually at some time in history you would buy something." Which is a silly defense and you know it, which is why you're now pretending you never said it</quote> You know what is a good defense? Pointing to someone else and going "Why didn't you call the cops on this guy?" I hope these guys sue Starbucks and win. Racial or not, they were somehow discriminated against given other "loiterers" in that specific store at that time and the general Starbucks attitude towards being a hangout.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 5:12:24 PM #146:	Crazyman93 posted... hockeybub89 posted... Why were being required to purchase something? Because they were taking up space that could be reserved for paying customers. How difficult is that to understand? But Starbucks is ok with that. I used to do it all the time without even a 2nd look. --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899830079] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>Crazyman93 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why were being required to purchase something?</quote> Because they were taking up space that could be reserved for paying customers. How difficult is that to understand?</quote> But Starbucks is ok with that. I used to do it all the time without even a 2nd look.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Crazyman93 04/17/18 5:13:43 PM #147:	hockeybub89 posted... Crazyman93 posted... hockeybub89 posted... Why were being required to purchase something? Because they were taking up space that could be reserved for paying customers. How difficult is that to understand? But Starbucks is ok with that. I used to do it all the time without even a 2nd look. How busy was the Starbucks? And by the way, your Walmart analogy doesn't work, most people buy something, unless they specifically don't have what they came in there for. --- let's lubricate friction material! ~nickels, Cars & Trucks <cite>Crazyman93 posted [p:899830147] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Crazyman93 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> Why were being required to purchase something?</quote> Because they were taking up space that could be reserved for paying customers. How difficult is that to understand?</quote> But Starbucks is ok with that. I used to do it all the time without even a 2nd look.</quote> How busy was the Starbucks? And by the way, your Walmart analogy doesn't work, most people buy something, unless they specifically don't have what they came in there for.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 5:13:48 PM #148:	hockeybub89 posted... You know what is a good defense? Pointing to someone else and going "Why didn't you call the cops on this guy?" Not really. Try that next time you get a speeding ticket. "Hey why didn't you give Jim a speeding ticket!? he speeds here too!" Well Jim wasn't caught. In fact better analogy, the cop doesn't give you a ticket, and just warns you, asking you politely to slow down. But you refuse and keep speeding. Then get mad at angry that you then get a ticket. hockeybub89 posted... I hope these guys sue Starbucks and win. Racial or not, they were somehow discriminated against There is absolutely no evidence of discrimination whatsoever. And you keep saying silly things then dropping them the moment they fall apart. You're just irrational and angry. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899830149] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> You know what is a good defense? Pointing to someone else and going "Why didn't you call the cops on this guy?"</quote> Not really. Try that next time you get a speeding ticket. "Hey why didn't you give Jim a speeding ticket!? he speeds here too!" Well Jim wasn't caught. In fact better analogy, the cop doesn't give you a ticket, and just warns you, asking you politely to slow down. But you refuse and keep speeding. Then get mad at angry that you then get a ticket. <cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote>I hope these guys sue Starbucks and win. Racial or not, they were somehow discriminated against </quote> There is absolutely no evidence of discrimination whatsoever. And you keep saying silly things then dropping them the moment they fall apart. You're just irrational and angry.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ImTheMacheteGuy 04/17/18 5:14:44 PM #149:	UnfairRepresent posted... ImTheMacheteGuy posted... "Proof that they were indeed loitering, would would confirm that were trespassing when the cops got involved... doesnt matter." Would would indeed. They were refusing to leave, refusing to buy anything and using the facilities. Once they refused to leave to staff and police, they were trespassing. You're literally arguing that it's okay to refuse to leave private property despite cops and relevant authorities repeately asking you to leave... It's silly. Do you know what actually doesn't matter? Do you know what is actually not relevant? Your asinine homeless man 15 years scenario. That was in relation to your defense "It's okay to ignore cops and staff and refuse to leave or buy anything so long as you claim that eventually at some time in history you would buy something." Which is a silly defense and you know it, which is why you're now pretending you never said it Did context abuse you as a child? Is that why you are so averse to it? They were waiting for a friend. When people are in such an establishment waiting for the remainder of their party, it stands to reason that one can presume they will order once the remainder of their party arrives. If proof is provided that they were never going to order, even when their arrived, I would concede that they were in fact loitering. I will say this dozens of times in addition to the 10-15 times I've said it across all of these topics, and I will not stop saying it until proof is given or this incident is no longer being spoken of on this board. If you want to have a stubbornness competition, keep ignoring and brushing it off. --- Place-holder sig because new phone and old sigs not saved :/ <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted [p:899830195] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> "Proof that they were indeed loitering, would would confirm that were trespassing when the cops got involved... doesnt matter."</quote> Would would indeed. They were refusing to leave, refusing to buy anything and using the facilities. Once they refused to leave to staff and police, they were trespassing. You're literally arguing that it's okay to refuse to leave private property despite cops and relevant authorities repeately asking you to leave... It's silly. <quote>Do you know what actually doesn't matter? Do you know what is actually not relevant? Your asinine homeless man 15 years scenario.</quote> That was in relation to your defense "It's okay to ignore cops and staff and refuse to leave or buy anything so long as you claim that eventually at some time in history you would buy something." Which is a silly defense and you know it, which is why you're now pretending you never said it</quote> Did context abuse you as a child? Is that why you are so averse to it? They were waiting for a friend. When people are in such an establishment waiting for the remainder of their party, it stands to reason that one can presume they will order once the remainder of their party arrives. If proof is provided that they were never going to order, even when their arrived, I would concede that they were in fact loitering. I will say this dozens of times in addition to the 10-15 times I've said it across all of these topics, and I will not stop saying it until proof is given or this incident is no longer being spoken of on this board. If you want to have a stubbornness competition, keep ignoring and brushing it off.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 5:14:49 PM #150:	hockeybub89 posted... But Starbucks is ok with that. I used to do it all the time without even a 2nd look. You refused to leave when asked repeatedly by staff and cops and they didn't give you a 2nd look? That's literally impossible. You'd have been to looked at several times to be asked repeatedly --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899830204] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>hockeybub89 posted...</cite> <quote> But Starbucks is ok with that. I used to do it all the time without even a 2nd look.</quote> You refused to leave when asked repeatedly by staff and cops and they didn't give you a 2nd look? That's literally impossible. You'd have been to looked at several times to be asked repeatedly</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Jiek_Fafn 04/17/18 5:14:55 PM #151:	Obvious smoke and mirrors PR bullshit, but it's not going to hurt anything and at least may make a few baristas second guess a bad decision in the future. Good job I guess, Starbucks. You at least made a token effort. --- PSN: Jiek FFRK: Tyro God Wall KZcv <cite>Jiek_Fafn posted [p:899830207] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote>Obvious smoke and mirrors PR bullshit, but it's not going to hurt anything and at least may make a few baristas second guess a bad decision in the future. Good job I guess, Starbucks. You at least made a token effort.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
hockeybub89 04/17/18 5:15:06 PM #152:	UnfairRepresent posted... People get asked to leave private property all the time dude. This is only strange because the guys just said no and demanded to stay for unknown reasons. So yes or not that a store can randomly pick out someone and force them to leave while others are left alone? Everyone in the local supermarket is just a loiterer that the manager is nice enough to not kick out? Any one or them can be singled out and deemed a trespassers? Are you another person who takes those Right to Refuse signs literally? --- http://card.psnprofiles.com/1/NIR_Hockey.png http://www.last.fm/user/hockeybub89/ <cite>hockeybub89 posted [p:899830217] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>UnfairRepresent posted...</cite> <quote>People get asked to leave private property all the time dude. This is only strange because the guys just said no and demanded to stay for unknown reasons.</quote> So yes or not that a store can randomly pick out someone and force them to leave while others are left alone? Everyone in the local supermarket is just a loiterer that the manager is nice enough to not kick out? Any one or them can be singled out and deemed a trespassers? Are you another person who takes those Right to Refuse signs literally?</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
UnfairRepresent 04/17/18 5:18:02 PM #153:	ImTheMacheteGuy posted... They were waiting for a friend. When people are in such an establishment waiting for the remainder of their party, it stands to reason that one can presume they will order once the remainder of their party arrives. Or when asked to leave or buy something go "ok we'll have one drink and then get more when our friend arrives." Narrative over. That's literally happened to me on more than one occasion. I've gone to met someone, they're running late. So I order something while I wait for them. ImTheMacheteGuy posted... If proof is provided that they were never going to order, even when their arrived, I would concede that they were in fact loitering. That's a ridiclous piece of logic and my homeless man analogy still fits. Whether or not at some point in history they were going to order is not relevant. They refused to leave or order repeatedly when asked. Their plans for the future don't matter. At this point all you're doing is insulting them. Saying "Sure they broke the law but its okay for them to do that becasue they are idiots." I think that's a horrible attitude to hold and refuse to disrespect them. --- ^ Hey now that's completely unfair. https://imgtc.com/i/14JHfrt.jpg <cite>UnfairRepresent posted [p:899830372] in Starbucks ... [t:76525647]...</cite> <quote><cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote> They were waiting for a friend. When people are in such an establishment waiting for the remainder of their party, it stands to reason that one can presume they will order once the remainder of their party arrives.</quote> Or when asked to leave or buy something go "ok we'll have one drink and then get more when our friend arrives." Narrative over. That's literally happened to me on more than one occasion. I've gone to met someone, they're running late. So I order something while I wait for them. <cite>ImTheMacheteGuy posted...</cite> <quote>If proof is provided that they were never going to order, even when their arrived, I would concede that they were in fact loitering.</quote> That's a ridiclous piece of logic and my homeless man analogy still fits. Whether or not at some point in history they were going to order is not relevant. They refused to leave or order repeatedly when asked. Their plans for the future don't matter. At this point all you're doing is insulting them. Saying "Sure they broke the law but its okay for them to do that becasue they are idiots." I think that's a horrible attitude to hold and refuse to disrespect them.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Current Events > Starbucks will close 8,000 US stores May 29 for racial-bias training (+) Yeah! (+)

Current Events > Starbucks will close 8,000 US stores May 29 for racial-bias training