And Pujols, for good measure.
Other people will want to engage in the ethical debate. I want to know what lens you scored.
I second 2. Corrective? Scientific? Details!
I was on the bus recently with a pair of professor-parents and their kids, and the 5 year old pointed at the patch of wide-angle distorted glass along the back window and said, "Daddy, what's that?" and the dad answered, "That's a Frenell Lens!" It made me laugh.
Standpipe actually ordered a single very expensive lentil, but they accidentally sent Standpipe a single even more expensive lentil, if you can believe that.
#4: "Fresnel". The S can be silent, but it should be more like "Fray-nell" than "Frenell". Or, just say "Freznel".
5: Standpipe should prepare the lentil very carefully and savor it to the utmost. It could be served with the previously-discussed recipe for a tiny amount of kirschwasser. And an ortolan.
Would it not be even more artistic to prepare the lentil desultorily, and then not even finish it?
Standpipe's stovetop lentil-wrap compound-worded on his Bridgeplate.
Would it not be even more artistic to prepare the lentil desultorily, and then not even finish it?
No.
Details!
It's a Micro-Nikkor 200mm f/4 AI. (For non-camera-nerds, this is roughly what you'd use to take detailed pictures of bugs, say, or your boss' nose hair, without get all up in their respective grills.)
Some people have principles, B. I wouldn't expect a Catholic to understand.
Fuck that noise. Their mistake, tough noogies.
Their mistake, tough noogies.
The kicker is, for what I'd be using it for, I'd still rather have the less expensive version. The dilemma here, thus, is do I make a hefty profit on [auction site], or go to heaven when I die?
I'm sure glad the person who found my wallet on Saturday felt differently.
More blegging:
1. Molly and I are going to get to watch one more movie this summer on a fun date in the theater. Should we see the X-Files movie or the Batman movie.
2. Should I read the sex thread below to decide whether I should come to the defense of B and Rockette?
You might expect some Catholics to understand, Christ-killer.
12: Score! Stick it to the Man and his incompetent shipping department!
Fungibility, ben. 18 betrays a lack of appreciation for fungibility.
and 18-year-olds will always betray us with their caprices.
17: Auction site!
18: Finding individual people's wallets is somewhat different, Benjamin. As is taking the change if a cashier accidentally thinks you gave him a $20 instead of a $10, or something, because in cases like that some poor schmo is in trouble. *This* error, however, will not show up until inventory, and will not be traceable to anyone, so the only people getting ripped off are Amazon or whoever Standpipe ordered it from.
Bridgeplate: Who sent you this? If you are the beneficiary of the incompetence of any corporation with more than 100 employees, you are allowed to gloat and feel lucky.
Also, does anyone else remember the PSA from the 70s featuring the Eskimo who gets a electric fan in the mail by mistake?
19.1: Is Molly really up for one of those? You're not doing that guy thing of making her go to the movie *you* want to see, are you?
Knowing you you're probably not, but I'm projecting because someone I know always does that. (Even though I do kinda wanna see the stupid batman movie.)
LR and B don't need some man sweeping in to defend them, you know, rob.
I found six dollars on the floor of the emergency room last weekend.
Who sent you this?
[Country's only reputable used-camera shop] sent it to me. So you can see why I'd be reluctant to bone them with the nearest manly man-rod.
17: Send it to me, and I'll buy you the cheaper lens. Problem solved.
Molly wants to see the X files, but I'm still really bitter about how much the show sucked the last two seasons. I'm only interested in the batman movie because I want to know what everyone else is nattering on about.
Also, we are trying to avoid the mistake we made our last two date nights, where we say Sweeny Todd and There will be blood
Just a warning, Bridgeplate: If this is somehow departmentally related, they will find you. Oh, yes. They will find you.
I remember you with fondness, ridiculously awesome projector-screen array. RIP.
Standpipe: The carbon footprint of all that return shipping is a real ethical concern. Find a local buyer and then re-order the one you wanted. It's the responsible thing to do. Just ask the polar bears.
27: W00t! Free money, and probably the person who dropped it is just thankful to be alive!
28: Ah. Okay, I guess your scruples are allowable. Just.
Maybe they'll be so grateful they'll send you something else for free!
30: Go see them both! Double-feature!
I'm only interested in the batman movie because I want to know what everyone else is nattering on about
Batman is holy crap good and you should see it. That being said I don't know that I would think of it as a date movie. Of course I don't know that I would consider the X-Files as a date movie either though I haven't seen it.
6: It's pronounced "fernell." Nothing like it's spelled.
Used camera shop? Babe, no, I probably wouldn't gleefully dance away with the lens. (I don't know why I call you "babe." I seem to like you. That other thread was spreading bad vibes, man.)
I like the way you think, Stanley.
ON THE OTHER HAND: It's kind of heavy, and would be just the thing to brain people who use too much alliteration in political rhetoric.
Maybe they'll be so grateful they'll send you something else for free!
See, I thought of that, too, and my response was: Self, you are indeed a Bad Person.
Hopefully your Self's response to that was, "Yeah, so?"
The X Files was the first tv show to be "our show", like Buffy or Battlestar. Put that way, we have to see it.
33: Our babysitter is only 14 years old. She has her own bedtime to take into account.
40: I feel you. What I wouldn't give for a truly responsible babysitter who was always available, instead of these damn teenagers.
37: Braining people is good....
I'm off to bed, most likely to dream about not cheating on an imaginary person with a second, also imaginary person.
42: You could even take imaginary photos using the lens you imagined when placing your original order!
I once got 100s instead of 20s from a BoA ATM. Unfortunately I only asked for $40, and I didn't press my luck.
You know what sucks? Dilemmas and difficult decisions. Looks like you're screwed either way, here, Standpipe. If you keep the lens, you're going to hate yourself for it, and all those pictures will be tainted with the bitter taste of ill-gotten-gains. BUT if you send it back, you know you're going to kick yourself in the ass. After all, musn't a little rain fall into every life? What's a little good fortune to balance out the bad? Everyone needs and deserves some good luck now and then.
So tell you what. I've always thought you were a cool whatsit standpipe. Mail me the lens and the address of the company you purchased it from. I'll take the burden of choice from you, and you will sleep soundly and peacefully. The guilt I incur from said choice will be balanced by the pride of doing a fellow human a good turn.
Everybody's pwnd by me finding the Palm Treo in the park last week. I left it there, which was very wrong, I think, but not as wrong as trying to work thru the "SSC Card" or whatever the partner said.
I also found a twenty laying on the sidewalk last week. Looked around, and kept it.
Need a serpentine, they told me today.
I have it on good authority the X-Files movie is no good. I have in on good authority the Batman movie is awesome good.
And Standpipe is good.
I swear, there was this PSA in the 70s with an Eskimo getting an electric fan in the mail, and the important message it was trying to impart was that if you get something in the mail you didn't ask for, you can keep it.
I thought the message of that PSA was that Eskimos have no morals.
Should we see the X-Files movie or the Batman movie.
The X-files movie is awful, awful, awful, and I say this as someone who watched the show religiously. They took my high school/college obsession, and figured they could wring a few bucks out of me. Duchovny and Anderson are fun to watch, but the plot is a weak double episode and they spend too much time moping. It's like they left the FBI and moved to Melrose Place or something.
My little sister, who spent middle school and high school watching the series and was obsessed, had this to say, via text message, agreeing that it was awful:
lol i know but at least it was only 5 bucks at the drive through and we could see hellboy II
So, it's worth it if you tack on another movie. Go see Batman, or go watch the X-files and come home annoyed.
Speaking of movies, the trailer for the new Harry Potter is out.
48, 49: The message was that if you get something in the mail unsolicited, you don't have to pay the invoice that arrives the next week. The Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 was what you were being told about.
1. Hellboy II is a big let down. And I say this as a fan of #1
2. "Bank error in your favor" is, I believe, the highest payout from any community chest/chance card. (advance to go is tied)
3. Is anyone seriously advocating keeping the lens? Even if you think we live in a moral void, selling yourself out for $285 bucks is gauche. Aim high, people.
For the record, I advocate doing the right thing, though the thought of keeping it would tempt me sorely. I would at least open the package and take the thing out for a spin before returning it. But just selling it would be crass.
Way to be pressured by the man, Jesus.
There was once a bank error in my favor to the tune of $2000 or so.
It was more parsimon's 36 that did it. I've happily accepted bank errors in my favor. But they have plenty of money, definitionally.
I've happily accepted bank errors in my favor.
The trouble is that the error usually comes to light by the end of the quarter, and then they take the money away without explanation or warning, so watch out.
Earlier this week I found a Razr phone and turned it in to the transit police. Another time I found some dude's plug adapter in a hotel room with his name and address on it, and I mailed it to him. He was totally psyched and wrote me a nice thank-you note. He thinks I'm a good person, but the truth is that earlier that morning I had received word that someone had found my lost wallet and mailed it back to me, so I figured I would be tempting fate not to do my karmic duty. Another time I found a hippie-style bag on the subway with a bong in it. I kept it, because it's not like the owner was going to report it lost to the police or anything.
FWIW, and IANAL, I believe that from a strictly legal standpoint SB is fully entitled to keep the item that was delivered to him. If true, this would enable him to call the seller, explain the situation, and negotiate over what goodies they will give him in order to send back the expensive lens.
There was a PSA featuring an Eskimo; it also featured a grandma unwrapping a set of mag rims suitable for a '70's muscle car. The point being that if you did not order a product from a company, you were not obliged to send it back, whether you had any use for it or not. (Companies were deliberately sending unordered items to people and then demanding payment for the item or its return and payment of shipping and handling fees.)
Return the lens; don't take it for a test spin because that's just tormenting yourself. Send it back with a slightly snotty note detailing the lens you ordered, the lens you got and demanding the correct lens and a discount on your purchase and repayment of shipping costs for the trouble caused by the screwups of their shipping department.
max
['Since they imposed a karmic debt on you, it's the least they can do.']
Or you could send a letter asking whether you should just keep it, or whether they wanted to pay to send it back. When I was a bookstore buyer, misfills were entirely the seller's responsibility, and it was up to them to arrange for its return. All you were really required to do was put the item in the prepaid box they provided and give it to the UPS guys.
I can't believe this is a debate and I can't believe y'all are making me agree with baa. Return it.
(But do call and have them e-mail you a pre-paid UPS label.)
I can't believe this is a debate
Yes, well.
Standpipe, how can it be that you are camera nerd, yet you have no photos on your Flickr account? Surely it is possible to take and post photos that reveal nothing about one's location, occupation, gender, etc. ?
I can't find the old post or comment which links to the discussion of the crazy guy who removed the temperature limiter from his oven so that he could make a proper pizza at home. Any help would be appreciated.
62: I don't understand the link. Are we turning to Magik Johnson for guidance?
64: wd, the guy has his own blog, and there was an article about him in the NYT food section within the last month.
Nevermind 64, I found what I wanted.
The missing indefinite article in 63? I meant to do that. For effect.
I have a friend who would keep it, and I look down on her for her dishonesty. She, on the other hand, thinks I'm a mug - e.g. when I was in Ikea and got asked for about £150, when I knew that the actual cost of the stuff was more like £300, I told them they'd undercharged me.
SP wrote he is not going to take it from the wrap, so he knows already that he won't keep it
58
"FWIW, and IANAL, I believe that from a strictly legal standpoint SB is fully entitled to keep the item that was delivered to him. ..."
IANALE but I doubt it.
I don't understand the link. Are we turning to Magik Johnson for guidance?
My point was that there is always debate, even if there's no debate. (That's a classic thread, if you haven't read it.)
Anyhow, see the update. *SUSPENSE*
how can it be that you are camera nerd, yet you have no photos on your Flickr account?
All my photos (all one of them) are available only through the group pool.
I always assumed Standpipe published all his pics at his blog.
IANALE but I doubt it.
You might want to consult the relevant statutes then.
§ 3009. Mailing of unordered merchandise (a) Except for (1) free samples clearly and conspicuously marked as such, and (2) merchandise mailed by a charitable organization soliciting contributions, the mailing of unordered merchandise or of communications prohibited by subsection (c) of this section constitutes an unfair method of competition and an unfair trade practice in violation of section 45 (a)(1) of title 15. (b) Any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, may be treated as a gift by the recipient, who shall have the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender. All such merchandise shall have attached to it a clear and conspicuous statement informing the recipient that he may treat the merchandise as a gift to him and has the right to retain, use, discard, or dispose of it in any manner he sees fit without any obligation whatsoever to the sender. (c) No mailer of any merchandise mailed in violation of subsection (a) of this section, or within the exceptions contained therein, shall mail to any recipient of such merchandise a bill for such merchandise or any dunning communications. (d) For the purposes of this section, "unordered merchandise" means merchandise mailed without the prior expressed request or consent of the recipient.
That said, the FTC does recommend offering to return the merchandise at the shipper's expense in the case of an honest error by the merchant, though it does not state that the consumer is under any obligation to do so.
OT:
Should I assume it's a measure to prevent bank runs that Bank of America is inexplicably preventing me from transferring money to another account with their website, or is that just paranoid?
I'm not going to check the caselaw, but I'd bet heavily that Knecht's citation has not been applied in cases of mistakenly sending the wrong product when some product was ordered (even though it's written broadly enough to cover it, depending on definitions) but rather to intentionally sending a product when no product was ordered and then demanding payment for the product.
If detinue sur trover is a recognized action under either federal or state law in a relevant jurisdiction, which I'm 99.99% sure it's not (and hasn't been for a few hundred years), they could bring such an action against you after a demand for return of the lens.
If detinue sur trover is a recognized action under either federal or state law in a relevant jurisdiction, which I'm 99.99% sure it's not (and hasn't been for a few hundred years), they could bring such an action against you after a demand for return of the lens.
Once again, IANAL, but were I a claimant, I would not want to be in the position of pitting an ancient, possibly archaic common law doctrine against the plain language of an Act of Congress passed just a few years ago.
My reading of the FTC website is that they are encouraging people to be good sports if the vendor makes a good faith error, but conspicuously absent from the FTC's advice is any language that identifies a legal obligation of the part of the recipient to return the goods, which you would think they would want to make perfectly clear if there was in fact a relevant distinction in the case law.
That statute is addressing the situation where a merchant who has no relation to a buyer sends them merchandise without "without the prior expressed request or consent of the recipient" and then charges them for it, which used to be a common scam. Given that Standpipe and the merchant here do have buyer/seller relationship, it's going to be governed by the UCC, as adopted by his state. What happened here is that the seller sent non-conforming goods, which Standpipe can accept or reject as he chooses and I don't really see a seller's remedy for that, but I might be missing it.
Given the fact that the quoted statute says that unordered merchandise "shall have attached to it" a notice saying that it's free, which would make no sense when an order is incorrectly filled, it seems plain that the intent is to cover cases such as w/d is discussing.
Plus it's not like the courts are exactly consumer-friendly these days.
W/D is right, but I think you might get the same conclusion under most (all) state UCCs. So Knecht is, in a way, sort of right. Maybe.
This feels like it should be an easy and clear-cut legal question, but I'm struggling with it. I seem to sort-of vaguely recall a case in law school on point, which suggested that the seller could, on discovering the error, demand either return of the nonconforming product or payment for the difference in value between the nonconforming product and the product that was paid for. (Assuming the buyer had accepted the non-conforming product.) But the memory is fuzzy enough that I don't really trust it. And, in any event, I don't think the buyer has any affirmative duty to bring the nonconformity to the seller's attention.
I filed a suit for trover, or in the alternative detinue, a few years back. In DC. Made the other guy have to look some stuff up.
which suggested that the seller could, on discovering the error, demand either return of the nonconforming product or payment for the difference in value between the nonconforming product and the product that was paid for
I think that would be the case if there was an explicit contract... which usually occurs with large expensive orders, such as when a building contractor orders 100,000 pounds of a specific grade of concrete.
In cases without an explicit contract, which would be covered by common commercial regulations, once the transaction occurs, it's over. Businesses and customers may customarily extend gratuities to each other to help maintain social balance ('The customer is always right.'), but I don't see how either group are legally obligated to make good on promises that were never actually made.
So I don't think Standpipe (my brain is now stuck on 'Standmixer Bridgeloan') is legally obligated to do a damn thing, and I don't think the seller has any recourse on their own screwup.
Morally, the situation seems identical to getting the wrong amount of a large sum of change. Customer X ordered an expensive lens and that lens wound up in Standpipe's shipping container and the lens Standpipe ordered wound up in Customer X's box. If Standpipe keeps the lens, he is effectively going to forcing other customers to make good on Customer X's lens. Plus the person who screwed up the shipping may continue his erroneous ways.
The Church of the Powerball conservative "Christianity" that seems to be very popular with the upper echelons of the Republican Party would no doubt take the Randroid line ('MINE MINE MINE') and say it is Standpipe's lens, UNLESS it was their business that screwed up, in which instance, how dare you, you subhuman scum customer, you. That's an awful world to live in (if no one has noticed), and that kind of thinking makes it a harder to urge sacrifice for the common good. Further, if I make a similar innocent mistake (like dropping my wallet), I would hope that people would point it out to me (that is, return the wallet); if I want other people to behave that way I have to do that myself.
So I see returning the lens as simply lubricating the roller bearings civilization spins on. If the seller in question has any class, they should be grateful to Standpipe for fixing their problem for them. If they ain't, then I'd find another seller to buy from.
max
['Blahdy blah blah.']
baa,
1. Hellboy II is a big let down. And I say this as a fan of #1
Maybe it is because I'm not fan #1, but I really like Hellboy a lot, so I thought it is a little let down, not a big one, but I wonder if I am biased because I saw Dark Knight first and any movie seen after Dark Knight is gonna have a tough row to how. So I'm gonna be squishy and hard to argue with. This time.
Here is a strong statement people are welcome to shoot down. But they won't, even though it is black and white and very simple.
For a good life do the right thing because it is the right thing to do and for no other reason.
Yeah, I know, what is a 'good' life and what is the 'right' thing? Man is it fun to stew over that one. You want an answer from me?! Sorry. My answer won't satisfy. My answer is decide for yourself and then by God be true to yourself and willing to learn as well. That's the best I can do. You want something better? Talk to somebody else.
row to how
I am having fun deciding whether this rhymes, and in what direction.
AWB,
Aw, man, I swear I typed that exactly correct. In my mind.
I mean I meant 'row' in the sense of a fight, or maybe fish eggs. Oh, crap. I give up.
Now you are gonna think I'm not perfect. Darn. Sorry. I don't want to let you down. I really am perfect. In my mind.