Minor things that bother you

[J N Winkler]

I don't think it's ratings inflation at play, since the incentives for lodging operators, rating sites like TripAdvisor, and consumers haven't really changed.  I think it's more a question of it being harder to find wage slaves to clean rooms.

[Takumi]

I probably wouldn't watch a movie with product placement in it if I knew that ahead of time. (Given that can mean anything from a barely-noticeable "all of the cars in the show happen to be Fords" all the way up to "this entire story is an infomercial for Google".)

What if it's blatant satire of the concept?
https://youtu.be/KjB6r-HDDI0

[Big John]

I probably wouldn't watch a movie with product placement in it if I knew that ahead of time. (Given that can mean anything from a barely-noticeable "all of the cars in the show happen to be Fords" all the way up to "this entire story is an infomercial for Google".)

I remember an episode of King of Queens where the placement of Doritos was so blatant it became an ad for them.

[abefroman329]

I probably wouldn't watch a movie with product placement in it if I knew that ahead of time. (Given that can mean anything from a barely-noticeable "all of the cars in the show happen to be Fords" all the way up to "this entire story is an infomercial for Google".)

In this case, it was a skosh to the right of "all your base are belong to Fords"

[jeffandnicole]

I had an experience this past weekend at a Hilton where, as a Diamond Tier Member, they didn't "thank me" for being a Diamond Member, didn't give me the complimentary bottle of water, and didn't state any of the perks I should have received.  A survey was received, so I filled it out this morning mentioning these issues.  (The rest of the stay was pretty good overall, and the survey reflected that).  A front office manager responded this afternoon with...a form letter, stating in part: "...Please know that your experience with your Diamond benefits is not typical for us and I'm sorry that we let you down...". 

Now granted, this was a free room via a credit card annual award, so I didn't pay anything, either with money or points.  Didn't buy anything charged to the room.  Unless they gifted me additional points, there's not much they could've done to right the issue to me.

Now I've seen various responses to other surveys, and often times they say they'll provide training to their staff.  It usually appeases the customer, believing that future guests will be treated better, and if they return, they'll have a more positive experience.  Which is total hogwash.  No company is going to take one random survey, which clearly is from the viewpoint of the customer and may not be completely accurate, and retrain dozens of people in the store, or thousands of people in a company.  But customers fall for that line all too often, and it keeps them coming back. 

[hbelkins]

I probably wouldn't watch a movie with product placement in it if I knew that ahead of time. (Given that can mean anything from a barely-noticeable "all of the cars in the show happen to be Fords" all the way up to "this entire story is an infomercial for Google".)

The best instance of product placement I can think of is "Christmas Vacation." Clark goes sliding right toward a big storefront with big white "WALMART" letters illuminated, and in the "get yourself something reeeeal nice" Christmas shopping scene, Cousin Eddie loads up the cart with Ol' Roy dog food.

[J N Winkler]

Now I've seen various responses to other surveys, and often times they say they'll provide training to their staff.  It usually appeases the customer, believing that future guests will be treated better, and if they return, they'll have a more positive experience.  Which is total hogwash.  No company is going to take one random survey, which clearly is from the viewpoint of the customer and may not be completely accurate, and retrain dozens of people in the store, or thousands of people in a company.  But customers fall for that line all too often, and it keeps them coming back.

The bedbug letter lives on.

[kphoger]

I generally don't respond to rating surveys at all. Ensuring good employee performance is management's job, not mine. The company pays them to do that, not me.

In my business, the technicians are out in the field, interacting with customers with no direct supervision.  Sure, the supervisors can follow up with customers, but doing that with every single customer would be a huge resource drain.  For example, yesterday our 18 technicians did 114 jobs just in the Kansas market.  Customer satisfaction surveys let our supervisors know which technicians need their attention to "ensure good employee performance" with customers.  When it comes to the technical side, the supervisors can go out and field-QC jobs, but other metrics show them which technicians' work actually needs to be field-QCed in the first place.

All that is to say, management can't actively monitor every employee's interaction with every customer, so your survey response gives them the tools they need to actually do what you expect them to do.

I don't think it's ratings inflation at play, since the incentives for lodging operators, rating sites like TripAdvisor, and consumers haven't really changed.  I think it's more a question of it being harder to find wage slaves to clean rooms.

Now I've seen various responses to other surveys, and often times they say they'll provide training to their staff.  It usually appeases the customer, believing that future guests will be treated better, and if they return, they'll have a more positive experience.  Which is total hogwash.  No company is going to take one random survey, which clearly is from the viewpoint of the customer and may not be completely accurate, and retrain dozens of people in the store, or thousands of people in a company.

My mother-in-law has worked in the hospitality business, specifically cleaning rooms, in Branson most of her life;  only a few years ago did she move out of that industry into a factory job.  My sister-in-law has also worked in the same capacity in the same area.  As such, my wife and I have a bit of an insider's take on the hotel business there:  several of the hotel owners are friends and acquaintances of the family.  And from what I've heard, plenty of hotel owners take online surveys very seriously these days.  They know people choose a hotel by its online rating and reviews, and so, if there's a bad review or two, the manager is very keen indeed to find out if he or she has a problem employee on staff.

Obviously not every hotel manager is the same.  Some don't seem to care.  I may have a different perspective than you too, simply because a lot of the hotels in Branson are mom-and-pop operations rather than national chains.  Anyway, when I look at online hotel reviews, I'm more willing to forgive a few bad reviews if the manager writes a personalized response that shows genuine concern to improve the situation.  I'm much less willing to forgive a few bad reviews, however, if the responses are basically all the same (your experience with your us is not typical, and I'm sorry that we blah blah blah):  this is barely any better than no response at all and smells strongly of just trying to safe face on the internet.

[JayhawkCO]

I had an experience this past weekend at a Hilton where, as a Diamond Tier Member, they didn't "thank me" for being a Diamond Member, didn't give me the complimentary bottle of water, and didn't state any of the perks I should have received.  A survey was received, so I filled it out this morning mentioning these issues.  (The rest of the stay was pretty good overall, and the survey reflected that).  A front office manager responded this afternoon with...a form letter, stating in part: "...Please know that your experience with your Diamond benefits is not typical for us and I'm sorry that we let you down...". 

Now granted, this was a free room via a credit card annual award, so I didn't pay anything, either with money or points.  Didn't buy anything charged to the room.  Unless they gifted me additional points, there's not much they could've done to right the issue to me.

Now I've seen various responses to other surveys, and often times they say they'll provide training to their staff.  It usually appeases the customer, believing that future guests will be treated better, and if they return, they'll have a more positive experience.  Which is total hogwash.  No company is going to take one random survey, which clearly is from the viewpoint of the customer and may not be completely accurate, and retrain dozens of people in the store, or thousands of people in a company.  But customers fall for that line all too often, and it keeps them coming back.

As someone who used to work at Marriott, I will say that if the survey scores for one property are consistently bad, heads roll pretty quickly, so at least you'll get a manager in charge of the front desk that gets better buy in from their staff. In your case, despite you just being one voice, those surveys do (in theory) get brought up in meetings so they become training moments.

[abefroman329]

I probably wouldn't watch a movie with product placement in it if I knew that ahead of time. (Given that can mean anything from a barely-noticeable "all of the cars in the show happen to be Fords" all the way up to "this entire story is an infomercial for Google".)

The best instance of product placement I can think of is "Christmas Vacation." Clark goes sliding right toward a big storefront with big white "WALMART" letters illuminated, and in the "get yourself something reeeeal nice" Christmas shopping scene, Cousin Eddie loads up the cart with Ol' Roy dog food.

At the opposite end of the spectrum is Planes Trains and Automobiles, where they had to invent fake transportation providers and make infrastructure for the fake companies because no real transportation provider wanted to be portrayed as incompetent. There's almost no product placement (an AmericaWest billboard at an L station, some print ads visible in the airport terminal, and the dairy company whose truck drives them home may be real?). 

[formulanone]

I probably wouldn't watch a movie with product placement in it if I knew that ahead of time. (Given that can mean anything from a barely-noticeable "all of the cars in the show happen to be Fords" all the way up to "this entire story is an infomercial for Google".)

The best instance of product placement I can think of is "Christmas Vacation." Clark goes sliding right toward a big storefront with big white "WALMART" letters illuminated, and in the "get yourself something reeeeal nice" Christmas shopping scene, Cousin Eddie loads up the cart with Ol' Roy dog food.

At the opposite end of the spectrum is Planes Trains and Automobiles, where they had to invent fake transportation providers and make infrastructure for the fake companies because no real transportation provider wanted to be portrayed as incompetent. There’s almost no product placement (an AmericaWest billboard at an L station, some print ads visible in the airport terminal, and the dairy company whose truck drives them home may be real?). 

Sadly, Oshkonoggin does not appear to be a real brand (though you can get stuff with the logo on it, and that gives me an idea).

I suppose if Brand X provided the truck and driver for a nominal cost or gratis, then I understand the "free" advertising...

[abefroman329]

I suppose if Brand X provided the truck and driver for a nominal cost or gratis, then I understand the "free" advertising...

I thought it might be a real brand since John Hughes seemed to like to put real regional brands in his movies (Matt's Chocolate Chip cookies in The Breakfast Club, Entemann's and Old Style in Sixteen Candles).

[SSOWorld]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

"Saving Money" - Is the money in danger? In danger or what? being used? being burnt? being lost?

[thspfc]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

"Saving Money" - Is the money in danger? In danger or what? being used? being burnt? being lost?

" Saving time" ? "Saving resources" ? "Saving energy" ? "Saving space" ? Do those all bother you?

[kphoger]

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

"Saving Money" - Is the money in danger? In danger or what? being used? being burnt? being lost?

The word has had this meaning since the 1300s.  It's time to accept it.

When þy lord lokeþ to haue · a-louaunce for hus bestes,
And of þe monye þow haddist þer-myd · hus meoble to saue

Translation:

When your lord looks to having credit for his animals,
And of the money you possessed with which his wealth to save

* Note:  This is my best attempt at a translation.  I'm no scholar in Middle English.

[ZLoth]

"Saving Money" - Is the money in danger? In danger or what? being used? being burnt? being lost?

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/saving?s=t
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saving
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/saving
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/saving
https://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/saving
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/saving

[CtrlAltDel]

"Saving Money" - Is the money in danger? In danger or what? being used? being burnt? being lost?

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/saving?s=t
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/saving
https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/saving
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/saving
https://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/saving
https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/saving

According to the OED, save in this sense dates to about 1390.

[kphoger]

The word has had this meaning since the 1300s.  It's time to accept it.

When þy lord lokeþ to haue · a-louaunce for hus bestes,
And of þe monye þow haddist þer-myd · hus meoble to saue

Translation:

When your lord looks to having credit for his animals,
And of the money you possessed with which his wealth to save

* Note:  This is my best attempt at a translation.  I'm no scholar in Middle English.

According to the OED, save in this sense dates to about 1390.

you don't say

[CtrlAltDel]

The word has had this meaning since the 1300s.  It's time to accept it.

When þy lord lokeþ to haue · a-louaunce for hus bestes,
And of þe monye þow haddist þer-myd · hus meoble to saue

Translation:

When your lord looks to having credit for his animals,
And of the money you possessed with which his wealth to save

* Note:  This is my best attempt at a translation.  I'm no scholar in Middle English.

According to the OED, save in this sense dates to about 1390.

you don't say

I do say! 

Anyway, the citation from the OED is:

He may saue moneye and gete Þat wol be curteys of his mete.

But I can't make heads or tails of anything past the "save money and" bit.

[zachary_amaryllis]

Driving with mom.

(fictional places and examples)
"Oh, turn at the old Smith place." Or, "The old Smith road" .

Or even worse "Turn (opposite from what lane I'm in) here! Turn here!"

Old Smith place was replaced by condos ... 20 years ago. The "Old Smith road" is now a suburban street with some stupid name "Windy Pines Knoll Drive" or something.

I'm a recovering pizza guy. Trust me, I know where I'm going. I'm also more-or-less deaf in my right ear, which means, if you're my passenger, I can't hear what you're telling me. If you've asked me to drive you somewhere, trust that  a: I know where I'm going already or b: I've already looked it up, and worked out the best path to get there.

Shouting directions (which sounds to me like mumbling through a blown speaker) doesn't help at all. I'll dope it out.

[1995hoo]

For the past few days, I've been getting various e-mail messages from the universities I attended claiming that there is an imminent "deadline" for me to donate money. I mildly resent that sort of thing because I personally do not face any deadline at all. They may have their own fiscal year or "giving year" or similar, and maybe they're concerned they won't meet their goal, but that's not my problem. From my point of view, the only deadline that ever applied was the calendar year and that was because if you want to deduct the charitable contribution it must be within the calendar year in which you want to deduct it.

I think part of why it's irking me right now is that you see so many warnings about being wary of scammers who try to make it seem like it's urgent for you to do what they're trying to convince you to do, and then these (admittedly legitimate) charitable organizations turn around and act like it's urgent.

[kphoger]

Anyway, the citation from the OED is:

He may saue moneye and gete Þat wol be curteys of his mete.

But I can't make heads or tails of anything past the "save money and" bit.

I'm seeing it translated as "He who takes care of his food can save money and get more".

[ZLoth]

One of the features that I like is that when you either power-down or switch between HDMI and DisplayPort inputs, it makes the monitor "disconnected" under Windows. This is especially handy when I'm working from home and switching my monitors from "Work mode" to "Personal mode". Up until a month ago, my configuration was that my primary monitor was a ViewSonic XG2703-GS acquired in late 2016 as the primary gaming monitor and a Acer K272HUL as my secondary monitor. All is good. If I turned off my secondary monitor, Windows will just accept that I have a single monitor now and not extend the displays.

Then Woot has a deal on a 240Hz ViewSonic XG271QG monitor at a very nice price. Instant sale. It became my primary monitor, while I moved my ViewSonic XG2703-GS to the secondary monitor mode. And that's when I discover a minor irritation: the ViewSonic XG2703-GS monitor keeps both the HDMI and DisplayPort inputs "live" even if I switch off the monitor with the power switch or switch inputs. The only way to disconnect the monitor is to disconnect the power. It's so annoying.

In case you are wondering, the Acer K272HUL is now sitting in my closet awaiting re-use.

[J N Winkler]

For the past few days, I've been getting various e-mail messages from the universities I attended claiming that there is an imminent "deadline" for me to donate money. I mildly resent that sort of thing because I personally do not face any deadline at all. They may have their own fiscal year or "giving year" or similar, and maybe they're concerned they won't meet their goal, but that's not my problem. From my point of view, the only deadline that ever applied was the calendar year and that was because if you want to deduct the charitable contribution it must be within the calendar year in which you want to deduct it.

I think part of why it's irking me right now is that you see so many warnings about being wary of scammers who try to make it seem like it's urgent for you to do what they're trying to convince you to do, and then these (admittedly legitimate) charitable organizations turn around and act like it's urgent.

I've been getting similar emails, which I just file and forget.  The latest round mentions a two-for-one match that is available only for donations that come in before June 30, when the organization's financial year ends.  I appreciate that there is research into behavioral psychology which suggests that deadlines are more likely to spur people into action, but I have to set my priorities for charitable giving to reflect the resources that are available, and those organizations just don't make the cut right now.  Perhaps they will in the future.

Regarding alumni communications in general, the ones that annoyed me the most came about five years ago when the foundation for my undergraduate university was compiling an alumni directory.  They outsourced the work to a private firm, which sent me postcards asking me to call them by telephone to confirm my address and contact details.  That was the only option--I could not use a Web form or send an email.  Since I am a deaf person, it is a lot less convenient for me to use a telephone, and I suspected part of the reason they wanted to call was to try to sell me a copy of the directory.  So I just said to myself:  No.  They must have sent at least 20 postcards and called at least five times, but I did not waver.

[1995hoo]

....

Regarding alumni communications in general, the ones that annoyed me the most came about five years ago when the foundation for my undergraduate university was compiling an alumni directory.  They outsourced the work to a private firm, which sent me postcards asking me to call them by telephone to confirm my address and contact details.  That was the only option--I could not use a Web form or send an email.  Since I am a deaf person, it is a lot less convenient for me to use a telephone, and I suspected part of the reason they wanted to call was to try to sell me a copy of the directory.  So I just said to myself:  No.  They must have sent at least 20 postcards and called at least five times, but I did not waver.

I got those types of communications as well, although I think mine were from the National Eagle Scout Association. I had the same reaction you did about them wanting to try to sell me some sort of hard-copy directory (which I would not want even if they weren't trying to market it to me–among other reasons, the information in such a book becomes outdated far too quickly). I remember they sent an e-mail once asking why I hadn't called and I responded that if they want my information, they could provide an online way to verify one's information. They never replied.