I was out shopping on Sunday and as I walked around a rack of clothes, I nearly ran into a tiny girl of about three years old. She started, "oh, I am sorry," and moved out of the way. It made me smile and I assured her that she was not in the way. I told her guardian- who looked to be her grandmother- that was standing right nearby how impressed I was at her courteousness. Her grandma said how they had tried very hard to instill that in her. Still, even though many parents strive to have their children be very poilte, it seems that at such a young age, many kids do not have enough self awareness to have any concept of their affect on other people.
To illustrate this, when I had foot surgery a few years ago and experienced a lot of complications and excruciating pain, I became afraid of little kids being around me. I would pick my injured foot up off the ground and tuck it under me, because of the way little kids have of stepping on or running right over people's feet.
It seems so many children are allowed to run wild out in public- not yours, Mel!- and do whatever they want, so it was nice to see such a tiny young lady that had enough self awareness to realize the effect she had on others and be so courteous about it. I tell you, it was pretty damn cute. After I walked away I heard her grandma tell her how good she had been and that she was going to get a reward. How sweet!
At work there are lots of rules; there is pretty much a rule for every single thing we do. I mean there is probably a documented procedure somewhere that tells us how to blow our noses, even. It is a rule-based way of doing things and to some people, okay, actually most people, that can be very frustrating. The opposing side of that would be a logical way of doing things. In a perfect wolrd, the rules of operations would have been based on the logical way to proceed, but unfortunately that is not the case most of the time.
I myself am a rules type person, but in contrast to that I am very logical. So my response when I see that the rules are stupid and pointless is that I try to change the rules. I think that is why I feel that I am always fighting for some type of cause. Most people would probably just ignore the rules and press onward, but to me it is a big deal if I have to violate rules or procedures and I am forced to set about to change them instead. What about you? Do you care about rules or just blatantly violate in the name of sanity and reason?
Any eBayers out there? I think most of us have tried either buying or selling on eBay at one point or another. I always turn to eBay for harder to find items and lots of times it is a great solution. Just in the last couple of days I have come up on an interesting situation on there and I wanted to see what you think.
I couldn't find any more jeans of a particular brand and cut that I love in my size. I decided to look on eBay and I found a pair of them brand new with tags. The description just said that they were new with tags and showed a photo and they looked just like the opnes I have that I love, so I bid. I ended up being the only bidder and won the auction for only $3.99 and the shipping was $8.99. The shipping was alittle on the high side, but I generally look at the combined total to determine if the item is a good deal anyway, and these were still a good deal with the inflated shipping.
The jeans arrived quickly in a flat rate envelope, and looked good. It was only when I went to try them on that I discovered a problem. The main "button" or stud that fastens the jeans at the waist was not there. I would have just gone into my sewing kit and found one of these stud type buttons and hammered it in place, but the stud that had been on these jeans must have caught on something and was ripped out of them leaving a good sized hole where it should have been.
I emailed the seller to let her know what had happened. Here is what I wrote: "Hi, I received the jeans in the mail today. When I tried them on I noticed that the main stud type button, the one that keeps the pants on, was not there. Normally I would have just found one in my sewing kit and hammered it in place and moved on, but there is a hole in the denim where the stud used to be that is
so large that it cannot be fixed. The hole is big enough to stick your pinky through. I am sure that you did not notice this problem as I didn't see it either until I tried the jeans on and could not button them. Please let me know how you would like to work this out; I am a very agreeable eBayer."
I got back a response asking for photos of the defect which is fine, and I provided them, but she also wanted to just refund the $3.99 and not the inflated shipping charge. If I were to take it to the level of a PayPal dispute I would still only get the $3.99 anyway because they don't get you the refunds on the shipping amount, inflated or not. I wasn't terribly satisfied with that arrangement so I decided to see what I could negotiate. I wrote back: "Unfortunately if you only refund the purchase price without shipping, I have essentially spent $9 and have nothing to show for it. It seems kind of crummy that I have to take a loss on these when all all I did was bid on and promptly pay for a pair of jeans that were supposed to be new with tags, not damaged. I understand that you did not notice this defect, but since it is a feature that is an absolutley essential one to a pair of jeans, don't you feel that the burden of inspecting them should fall on the seller rather than the buyer? I am trying to be as reasonable as I can but I also do not feel as though I should be coming away from this transaction disappointed and out money, even though it is not a large amount."
So what do you think is going to happen? And what would you have done? Was there a better way to handle things than what I did? What would you have done?
UPDATE: The seller replied to my last email like this "Jen, It was kind of hard to see in the photos, but I will take your word for it. I do not know what you want me to do, if I refund the shipping then I am out money for shipping it, ebay fees and paypal fees. I TOTALLY understand that it was a misunderstanding and something that was overlooked on my part. I too was mislead when I had listed them, believing that they were brand new with no defects. The most I could give back would be the $3.99 you paid and $4.00 for the shipping costs. If this sounds good to you please let me know and I will refund your money as soon as I get the ok. I am very sorry again!"
It isn't a perfect deal for me, but better than before. I wrote back, "I have attached two more photos so that you can see for yourself. I was trying to include more of the jeans in the first set of pics I sent so that you could see that they were the ones you sent. These are close ups. While I would like to get back all of the money I have spent, I feel that the offer of refunding $4.00 of the shipping plus the purchase price is something I can live with and it is more fair as we are sharing the loss more proportionately. In that case I could feel okay about leaving good feedback for you if you will do so for me." She refunded me $8.00 today and so I am only out about five bucks now, and I don't have to send the jeans back, though I don't think they can be fixed-the hole is too large. But at least my feedback rating will not suffer. It just wasn't worth it to press any further and make a big deal over a few bucks, so I gave in. Such is life.
Now that Andy is back on first shift for the first time in over a year, it takes a little shuffling in the morning for both of us to get ready. I have a vanity table in the bedroom so I can be out of his way when I sit and do my hair and all, so that helps. We have a small bathroom with only one sink, and if the sink is running when the shower is, the temperature is affected- you know, freezing or burning.
This morning I was waiting for Andy to get finished with the sink so that I could take a shower. He said, "Go ahead, I am mostly done with the sink; I am just brushing my teeth." I replied that I couldn't because I hadn't brushed my teeth yet. He was all like what the hell does that have to do with anything? I explained that I have to brush my teeth first, while I am still in my pajamas, because I might get toothpaste on my clothes if I was already dressed. He thinks I am very odd.
Other people have pointed out some strange little things like that that I do. When I think about it, there are quite a few little "quirks" like that about me. Like I insist on going the same direction down the aisles at the grocery store every trip. I just get used to where all the stuff is on the shelves when I am walking the aisles in a particular direction, so if I skip an aisle and end up going the direction from what I am used to it screws me up and I forget things. And I hate to just make one big mess when I am working on something. I like to try to clean as I go. When I get a small pile of trash, I'll dispose of it rather than save it all up and get rid of a huge pile at the end. This stuff doesn't sound that weird to me because I have rational reasons for all of it, but I guess the rest of the world thinks I am a little nutty.
At work today a few of us were sitting around the break room at lunch sort of half watching TV. The Pepto-Bismol Max Monsters commercial below came on and one of the guys brought up an interesting point.
He said, "Ew, the 50-foot woman with diarrhea, that is not something I even want to think about" and then he made a little retching noise for effect. He said "I mean I am down with the whole 50-foot woman thing, but giant diarrhea, ick." I don't think that was the reaction that advertising execs had in mind. Ooops.
I went out poking arouns at a store today and tried on a few things, but the selection was icky. There are certain trends in fashion that I just love, things like boot-cut jeans that are so slimming. But it seems that there are a lot more supposedly fashionable things that I don't like and will just never understand. So I am giving you a little list.
1. Low-rise jeans. Ultra low-rise jeans can look fabulous on some people. Trouble is, most of them are twelve. Women with an average build generally look horrible in these things, and they are quite prevalent in the stores. I tried on a pair of them today and it felt so stupid to zip up a little bitty two inch fly. Sometimes it is a struggle to find non-low-rise jeans. The other trend I truly dislike in women's jeans is stretch. I know that a lot of women like them- they must- stretch jeans are everywhere, but I can't stand them. I hate the way they feel and I have never tried on a pair that didn't make me look ridiculous. Also take a pair of stretch jeans and add low-rise to them and you have a recipe for a muffin top. Ew.
2. Pointy toed shoes. I imagine there might be some backlash at me here, because I know they are very popular, but I really loathe pointy toed shoes. Why would I want my feet to look like they belong to an elf or a witch? It is just unnatural and I cannot get used to them. Maybe you see it differently?
3. Tissue weight fabric. There seems to be a movement toward using very lightweight almost sheer fabrics for things tee shirts and other knit shirts. It just feels like the manufacturers are "cheaping out." The shirts are so damn thin a mosquito bite would be a visible lump under them. And bra lines will stand out blaringly.
What current fashions are you not enamored with, if any? Are there any trends that look terrible on you even if you do like them?
Andy had a nightmare last night that I left him- at least he says it was a nightmare, some may question that, he he. Anyway it must have been quite realistic because when I got home I had flowers- mini sunflowers, which are my favorite and some other mixed spring flowers- a card, and even a little present!
I know how he must've felt because Ii have had dreams like that before, where I woke up almost in a cold sweat after dreaming that he left me. At least when I woke up from those kind of dreams he was there to reassure me. Andy woke up from his bad dream after I was already at work, so he didn't have that. Have you ever had dreams that were so realistic that it took you a while after waking up to shake them off?
We go through a lot of training at work, and some of it is quite repetitive. Every year we go through a series of online training sessions on topics such as ethics. The ethics trainer was something we were all pretty familiar with as it was reused for several years. I took my ethics training today only to find that it had been completely redone and even introduced some concepts that I had never heard of. One of the new terms that I was introduced to in the training was "microinequities." Am I just the last one to the party? Does everyone else know what it means?
For those that might be in the dark like I was you probably know exactly what microinequities in the workplace are, you just didn't know they had a name. From Wikipedia: "Microinequity is a term for a variety of disparaging messages, typically subconscious in nature, that may discourage and devalue someone. A microinequity may be a gesture, rumor, look or even tone of voice. The cumulative effect of microinequities can impair a person's performance in the workplace or classroom, damage self-esteem, any may eventually lead to that person's withdrawal from the situation...An inequity implies there is some comparison. For example, if your boss doesn't listen attentively to you, that in and of itself is not a microinequity. However, if your boss listens attentively to almost all of your co-workers, but not to you, that would be a microinequity."
I never knew there was a name for those kind of things, but I am very familiar with the concept. An ex-boss of mine is a master of these microinequities. I never knew what it was that he was doing, I only knew that he made me feel like shit no matter how great of a job I did and I couldn't pinpoint exactly why. Have you ever experienced this phenomenon? Thankfully I am in a good place at work now, but I think it is interesting that companies are actually recognizing these subtle little negativities and pointing them out to employees. I wonder, when the managers that are the major purveyors of microinequities take the training, will they stop and think, "hey, that is what I do all the time" and see the horrible impact it has on employees?
I guess I am naive or too trusting, though I like to think of myself otherwise. I am quick to recognize scams and have no problems with being swindled out of money or anything, but in personal aquaintance relationships I have been conned a few times.
I just learned of another case where I was led to believe a certain person when they told their side of a story, and it turns out that the whole time I was being fed lies. The lies turned out to be inconsequential to me, they were about the person telling them and I really don't care that much, but I am rather shocked that I was in the dark for so long when everyone around me knew the truth.
I had always had my suspicions about this person, and due to that I always kept them at arms length, but I did believe them, even when all of the evidence was to the contrary. I guess I want to see the best in people and I give them the benefit of the doubt. And once again, I have been had.
I was reading an article in a computer magazine the other day that was talking about the different virtual currencies that are part of video games and how people are making real money through them. Apparently there are items that can be earned and used in the virtual worlds of video games that are played by millions of people, and some of them actually have an unofficial trading rate on eBay. There are enterpreneurs that are making big money from these games and now the IRS is thinking of stepping into the virtual world with its hand out.
This is not very far fetched, as people are making real income this way. Pondering this makes me think of Blogging, and some of the blog traffic exchange services out there. Consider BlogExplosion. You can list your blog there and then earn credits by surfing blogs or playing different blog games. But credits can also be bought with real cash, and renters can even "rent" space on your blog with credits. In essence, if they can buy credits with real money, and they pay you to rent your blog space, then they are actually paying you, right? And there are other blog traffic exchange services that actually allow users to sell their credits for cash if they choose. How long before the IRS steps in and wants a cut of that too? Maybe not now while the monetary amounts are relatively low, but you can bet that will change at some point. How long before blogs income is a commonly reported type of income on tax returns across America?