3 ms·

No, this is how frustrated children solve their problems. Please don't recommend it.

by infecto 3y ago

account42 3y ago
You haven't provided a better solution.
- infecto 3y ago
  Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there.
  - account42 3y ago
    > Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? Because you want others to believe that that is a bad solution. If its the only available effective solution then it isn't bad. > It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there. How many gas station chains do you have to choose from near you and what makes you think that the others won't just put on the same annoying ads? Voting with your wallet is meaningless for issues where most people will begrudingly put up with something because there are only so many options and there are more important differences to them (mostly price).
    - infecto 3y ago
      The "only effective solution" for gas station ads? There is no counter point to incredible statement.
  - photonthug 3y ago
    At some point property damage really is self defense if said property is actively engaging in what amounts to assault. And vote-with-your-dollar is silly advice when we cannot assume there are available alternatives, and when the "disruptors" and "marketing wizards" involved with this crap are explicitly reaching for captive-audiences, do not provide volume controls or off buttons, etc. Sometimes the gas station ads start up blaring noise after you've already paid, so you can't tell when you're going to get hit with them. And good luck finding a taxi or an airline without a screen blasting at you, effectively further monetizing people even though they are already paying for a service. Even first-class passengers everywhere are subjected at minimum to a litany of "join our miles club" crap every time they fly. If passengers aren't force-fed this stuff on the screen in front of them, it will be on the PA system, which really ought to be reserved for actual information/emergencies and not used as part of "captive audience" shenanigans to improve someone's margins. This behavior is sickening and should really be illegal. Since it's not illegal to engage in assault-through-advertising though, property damage starts to look like the only way for consumers to speak a language that corporations understand, i.e. by affecting bottom-lines and margins.
nehal3m 3y ago
How would you go about solving this problem then?
- infecto 3y ago
  What problem, annoying ads playing at a gas station? Gee I don't know, maybe not pump at gas station chains that use ads? Even as annoying as they might be, I can hold in my inner angst to deface property for the 4mins it takes to pump up my car.
  - chimprich 3y ago
    Boycotts don't work and it's hopelessly idealistic to think they do. What happens if you boycott your closest petrol station, spend extra cash, time and CO2 to reach the next closest one? You've penalised yourself, and the environment. You may or may not convince other people to do the same, but the drop in revenue may not be noticed, or not get attributed correctly, or might be more than offset by the extra revenue from the adverts. Meanwhile the replacement place that you're using notices that people seem to be tolerating the annoying adverts so they decide to do the same. Direct action is likely to be more effective.
  - Teever 3y ago
    But if all gas stations do this, what is the solution? You're admonishing someone for proposing a solution that you consider unacceptable, but you're not providing any alternative solutions. What is the solution to the problem?
salawat 3y ago
Every now and again, children have a way of cutting through the pretense and conceit of a problem let to fester far too long under some assumed adult guise of "civility". Channel the inner 5 year old. It's the only way to be sure.

No, this is how frustrated children solve their problems. Please don't recommend it.

account42 3y ago

You haven't provided a better solution.

infecto 3y ago
Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there.
- account42 3y ago
  > Why would I need to provide a better solution to property damage? Because you want others to believe that that is a bad solution. If its the only available effective solution then it isn't bad. > It should be obvious, vote with your dollar, don't pump gas there. How many gas station chains do you have to choose from near you and what makes you think that the others won't just put on the same annoying ads? Voting with your wallet is meaningless for issues where most people will begrudingly put up with something because there are only so many options and there are more important differences to them (mostly price).
  - infecto 3y ago
    The "only effective solution" for gas station ads? There is no counter point to incredible statement.
- photonthug 3y ago
  At some point property damage really is self defense if said property is actively engaging in what amounts to assault. And vote-with-your-dollar is silly advice when we cannot assume there are available alternatives, and when the "disruptors" and "marketing wizards" involved with this crap are explicitly reaching for captive-audiences, do not provide volume controls or off buttons, etc. Sometimes the gas station ads start up blaring noise after you've already paid, so you can't tell when you're going to get hit with them. And good luck finding a taxi or an airline without a screen blasting at you, effectively further monetizing people even though they are already paying for a service. Even first-class passengers everywhere are subjected at minimum to a litany of "join our miles club" crap every time they fly. If passengers aren't force-fed this stuff on the screen in front of them, it will be on the PA system, which really ought to be reserved for actual information/emergencies and not used as part of "captive audience" shenanigans to improve someone's margins. This behavior is sickening and should really be illegal. Since it's not illegal to engage in assault-through-advertising though, property damage starts to look like the only way for consumers to speak a language that corporations understand, i.e. by affecting bottom-lines and margins.

nehal3m 3y ago

How would you go about solving this problem then?

infecto 3y ago
What problem, annoying ads playing at a gas station? Gee I don't know, maybe not pump at gas station chains that use ads? Even as annoying as they might be, I can hold in my inner angst to deface property for the 4mins it takes to pump up my car.
- chimprich 3y ago
  Boycotts don't work and it's hopelessly idealistic to think they do. What happens if you boycott your closest petrol station, spend extra cash, time and CO2 to reach the next closest one? You've penalised yourself, and the environment. You may or may not convince other people to do the same, but the drop in revenue may not be noticed, or not get attributed correctly, or might be more than offset by the extra revenue from the adverts. Meanwhile the replacement place that you're using notices that people seem to be tolerating the annoying adverts so they decide to do the same. Direct action is likely to be more effective.
- Teever 3y ago
  But if all gas stations do this, what is the solution? You're admonishing someone for proposing a solution that you consider unacceptable, but you're not providing any alternative solutions. What is the solution to the problem?

salawat 3y ago

Every now and again, children have a way of cutting through the pretense and conceit of a problem let to fester far too long under some assumed adult guise of "civility". Channel the inner 5 year old. It's the only way to be sure.