4 ms·

You're right that the US is very proud of their trigger and muzzle discipline. Or at least half of it. The other half points loaded guns with the safeties off d

You're right that the US is very proud of their trigger and muzzle discipline. Or at least half of it. The other half points loaded guns with the safeties off directly at their own crotches to own the libs[0]. Going a layer deeper, Americans really, really love to abuse the shit out of customer service workers. To put it extremely charitably, we're used to being fucked by corpos so we pre-emptively fuck them back in the dumbest way possible. Less charitably, our country has a bunch of bullies that want to shout at anything they can bully. I don't think they'd actually pull the trigger, but, y'know, law of large numbers, times small but non-zero probability of homicide by virtue a gun being present on the scene equals probably at least one murdered cable tech. [0] https://pluralistic.net/2020/05/28/holographic-nano-layer-catalyser/#musketfuckers https://pluralistic.net/2020/05/28/holographic-nano-layer-ca...

sublinear 3y ago
> Americans really, really love to abuse the shit out of customer service workers. That wasn't my experience when I worked in customer service for a few years. Maybe 10% of people were like that and it was always because they were tired of not getting solutions to their problems, and that was always because their account fell into a bad spot in the customer service flow policy (suspicious activity, low LTV, fraud, etc.). It was really hard to take any of that personally. I'd argue it's more like the corporate powers that be often have unforgiving policies and account review practices sending people to the moon with anger.
- watwut 3y ago
  10% of people being like that sounds like a lot to me.
- TeMPOraL 3y ago
  > low LTV I think I see where the problem is on the corporate side. Sucks to be in customer support. The job really seems to be a buffer between abusive company policies and the angry customers.
- lo_zamoyski 3y ago
  > It was really hard to take any of that personally. Indeed. When companies abuse their customers, customer service is not only the only way by which a problem can even hope to be resolved, but it is the job of customer service to do so. They are representatives of their companies, the interface between the customer and the service their company offers. Now, I don't sanction abuse, of course, and pulling guns on people is insane, but that's not what you have in mind here, and knowing how tortured and stretched the definition of "abuse" some people have is, I will say you do sometimes need to be somewhat aggressive and push to escalate your problem to get the customer service rep. to transition on their script's finite state machine to a helpful state and outcome. In those cases, don't blame the customer. Blame the corporation. Corporations often like to drag their feet to maximize profit with all sorts of ridiculous and unsavory tactics. It's like being automatically enrolled in something by default and burdening the customer with unsubscribing; on average you can steal at least a little money from those who don't unsubscribe, or do so only after a couple months have passed. The time and burden of doing so (a form of theft), and the lack of genuine consent (Pacta sunt servanda, buddy!), doesn't seem to be accounted for.
- coldtea 3y ago
  >Maybe 10% of people were like that That's 1-2 a day minimum!
- rsynnott 3y ago
  10% customers being abusive seems _extremely_ high.
vxNsr 3y ago
> It turns out that the origin of this is not "owning the libs" – it's "owning responsible gun owners." -from your source Yikes on linking to the wrong article that totally invalidates your argument.
wl 3y ago
That Vice article and the pluralistic blog spam post don't understand what a Fudd is. A Fudd is a curmudgeonly, old fashioned gun owner who is judgmental about people owning modern firearms. They favor hunting and shotgun games over handguns and semiautomatic rifles. If they own handguns at all, think revolvers and 1911s instead of Glocks. Generally, Fudds tend to be very adamant about safe gun handling, often advocating for range rules that are overly restrictive like prohibiting aimed rapid fire. They're not the kind of people who point loaded handguns at their crotches to get a reaction out of people online. The people who are pointing loaded guns at their crotches are mocking people who take the four rules of gun handling very seriously, including both Fudds and most "normal" gun owners. They're trolls that exist almost exclusively online. They don't make up anywhere near half of gun owners and they're unwelcome at pretty much any gun club or public range.
- Kerb_ 3y ago
  I agree with almost all of this, but a lot of the people who point loaded guns at their crotches act like normal people at the range or shoot at unsupervised DNR land
- throw10920 3y ago
  > That Vice article and the pluralistic blog spam post don't understand what a Fudd is. Of course they don't, because they're not journalism, they're activism. They don't report - they incite. Thank you for taking the time to actually provide useful information.
tzs 3y ago
> Or at least half of it. The other half points loaded guns with the safeties off directly at their own crotches to own the libs[0] The source you cited specifically says it is not to own the libs.

sublinear 3y ago

> Americans really, really love to abuse the shit out of customer service workers. That wasn't my experience when I worked in customer service for a few years. Maybe 10% of people were like that and it was always because they were tired of not getting solutions to their problems, and that was always because their account fell into a bad spot in the customer service flow policy (suspicious activity, low LTV, fraud, etc.). It was really hard to take any of that personally. I'd argue it's more like the corporate powers that be often have unforgiving policies and account review practices sending people to the moon with anger.

watwut 3y ago
10% of people being like that sounds like a lot to me.
TeMPOraL 3y ago
> low LTV I think I see where the problem is on the corporate side. Sucks to be in customer support. The job really seems to be a buffer between abusive company policies and the angry customers.
lo_zamoyski 3y ago
> It was really hard to take any of that personally. Indeed. When companies abuse their customers, customer service is not only the only way by which a problem can even hope to be resolved, but it is the job of customer service to do so. They are representatives of their companies, the interface between the customer and the service their company offers. Now, I don't sanction abuse, of course, and pulling guns on people is insane, but that's not what you have in mind here, and knowing how tortured and stretched the definition of "abuse" some people have is, I will say you do sometimes need to be somewhat aggressive and push to escalate your problem to get the customer service rep. to transition on their script's finite state machine to a helpful state and outcome. In those cases, don't blame the customer. Blame the corporation. Corporations often like to drag their feet to maximize profit with all sorts of ridiculous and unsavory tactics. It's like being automatically enrolled in something by default and burdening the customer with unsubscribing; on average you can steal at least a little money from those who don't unsubscribe, or do so only after a couple months have passed. The time and burden of doing so (a form of theft), and the lack of genuine consent (Pacta sunt servanda, buddy!), doesn't seem to be accounted for.
coldtea 3y ago
>Maybe 10% of people were like that That's 1-2 a day minimum!
rsynnott 3y ago
10% customers being abusive seems _extremely_ high.

vxNsr 3y ago

> It turns out that the origin of this is not "owning the libs" – it's "owning responsible gun owners." -from your source Yikes on linking to the wrong article that totally invalidates your argument.

wl 3y ago

That Vice article and the pluralistic blog spam post don't understand what a Fudd is. A Fudd is a curmudgeonly, old fashioned gun owner who is judgmental about people owning modern firearms. They favor hunting and shotgun games over handguns and semiautomatic rifles. If they own handguns at all, think revolvers and 1911s instead of Glocks. Generally, Fudds tend to be very adamant about safe gun handling, often advocating for range rules that are overly restrictive like prohibiting aimed rapid fire. They're not the kind of people who point loaded handguns at their crotches to get a reaction out of people online. The people who are pointing loaded guns at their crotches are mocking people who take the four rules of gun handling very seriously, including both Fudds and most "normal" gun owners. They're trolls that exist almost exclusively online. They don't make up anywhere near half of gun owners and they're unwelcome at pretty much any gun club or public range.

Kerb_ 3y ago
I agree with almost all of this, but a lot of the people who point loaded guns at their crotches act like normal people at the range or shoot at unsupervised DNR land
throw10920 3y ago
> That Vice article and the pluralistic blog spam post don't understand what a Fudd is. Of course they don't, because they're not journalism, they're activism. They don't report - they incite. Thank you for taking the time to actually provide useful information.

tzs 3y ago

> Or at least half of it. The other half points loaded guns with the safeties off directly at their own crotches to own the libs[0] The source you cited specifically says it is not to own the libs.