Now with added stupidity

Thanks to Jill for pointing me to Not Always Right, a source of great entertainment, a warm sense of familiarity and Deep Thought.* Well, maybe not so much the Deep Thought part. But this bit does tie in to something I was talking to Beloved about this morning.

See, he bought a tube of toothpaste. (How's that for an intro! You're agog to know what happens next, aren't you?) Anyway, different brand to the usual, and I took one look at it and identified it as American. For why? Because the tube features the instruction: "Squeeze tube from end." (And another line to the same effect, that I forget. I'm not going to check or photograph it, like a good blogger, because Beloved is sleeping off night shift and I'd only disturb him.) Now, I am very sorry my Yankee friends, but there is something deeply American about spelling out how to use a toothpaste tube. No? This is not exactly high technology.

I should point out that Beloved disagrees with me. He thinks this is a very sensible thing to put on the tube, because "so many people get it wrong and the tube ends up a horrible mess when it's squeezed in the middle, which is Just Wrong!" Which is all very well, but really: is it necessary to tell the consumer how not to make a mess? Can they not be left to form their own habits and have their own domestic squabbles about who is doing it right or wrong? (Did you know that there is a Right and a Wrong way to hang a toilet roll? Uh huh. I bet a comment poll would reveal that many of you agree with this in principle, but you'd differ on which way was the Only Right Way.)

So I was trying to figure out the rationale behind printing this on the tube. It strikes me as excessively patronising, but without any clear purpose. I mean, "Warning: Coffee is hot!" is also pretty damn patronising. But you know that the companies putting up those signs are doing it to cover their ass, because as seen above, people will sue. I don't really see any health and safety issues with the toothpaste tube, though. Thoughts?

_____
* But this one just makes me sad, because she is clearly disturbed.

Darth Wader

From explainthisimage.com, via Non-Working Monkey.

I don't actually want to explain the images though. I think I really prefer them without the captions. There's not enough unapologetic surrealism in the world.

Excuse me ma'am, do you have a licence to drive that internet?

I really shouldn't be writing this.

It's not nice to laugh at stupid people. And it's *really* not nice to call a customer stupid.

But REALLY.

I've received a couple of very irate emails from an American customer, wanting to know why she had been charged $90 instead of $62 for her order. Of course, the order total actually came to £62. It's all down to the miracle of global commerce.

Now, on Ravelry and in email, I have been accused of being "very sneakkkkyyyyyy" and of practising deception on my poor unsuspecting customers by not spelling out that my BRITISH site uses BRITISH currency. I am not sure exactly how much more spelling out is required. Consider:
- the domain name ends in co.uk - I even put that in my online ads, to make it clearer for forruners who might happen to see the ads
- all prices everywhere, including order totals etc, are clearly marked with a £ symbol
- foreign addresses at checkout trigger the options to choose between "international airmail" and "international surface mail"
- etc, etc, etc...

So I was a little bit gobsmacked. However, there are more clues that this poor woman is - shall we say - a few stitches short of a sock. Consider:
- her Rav name includes a misspelled version of a word meaning insane
- she claims she was cheated out of $40 (90 minus 62? Hm)
- the best part? She is furious that my evil, scheming, deceptive shop did not show that the prices were in "England dollars".

So HA HA HAAAAA. You're stupid. I win.

(Man, my tolerance levels have just gone right down the tube since getting knocked up...)

Insert eye rolling here

Inevitably, there's now a (whole lot of) Christian bus ads to respond to the "atheist" (more agnostic, really) bus ads responding to the original, perhaps overly aggressive Christian bus ads.

Interesting to note that the Advertising Standards Authority had received hundreds of complaints that the (frankly rather sweet) "atheist" ad was "offensive to Christians" and, most puzzlingly, the "no God" claim could not be substantiated.

Hm. What was that slogan again exactly?


And people really thought they could argue with the "facts" of a fuzzy little statement like "probably no God"? But presumably these complainers have no objection to the Christian ads, eg "There is DEFINITELY a God, BELIEVE"? I suspect the ASA is in for quite a headache...

PS For a much more lovable Christian response, see here.

It... it... I...

I can't explain just why I find this so...

Um.

Well.