Fine Bruce... don't start out though believing the system itself is noble. You can read it as justification if you want to. I read it as an accident occurred and the camera should not have stopped working.
Tom C. On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Bruce Dayton <[email protected]> wrote: > Everything I read indicates justification for that which you > inherently know is wrong - doesn't make it right, just allows you to > go with the flow so you can take advantage as the next guy. > > I'm saying this is part of what is wrong with our society - instead > of teaching morals and values we end up teaching how to beat and > manipulate the system. I think this is a slow downward spiral that > leads to a bad ending. As everyone becomes savvy to what you know, > then they all start screwing the system and then the > retailers/manufacturers pad the products even more. It becomes a > viscous cycle. The only loser is us - the retailer and manufacturer > just pass it on. Society goes downhill and we all learn how to > mistrust each other and pay more for stealing from each other. Much > a long term no-win scenario. > > Go back to think about what you would want to teach your own children. > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Friday, May 21, 2010, 10:20:53 AM, you wrote: > > TC> Bruce, > > TC> The question in my mind became in this instance: > > TC> Did spilling a single drink on the camera make the owner at fault for > TC> the subsequent failure of the object? My wife has a G9 and I have a > TC> G10, the predecessors to the G11. Knowing their build quality and > TC> that I use the G10 in wet and windy conditions when skiing, I would > TC> not think that spilling something on any modern camera should > TC> immediately make it inoperative. > > TC> Back to the moral issues since that seems to be what we're talking > TC> about. I'll say what I think and am willing to take the brunt of it. > > TC> Big picture, not just this incident - Does being honest *always* > TC> require telling everything you know? If the answer is yes, then I'm > TC> afraid one will find themselves at a severe disadvantage as there are > TC> certain types of people who will capitalize on that to their own > TC> advantage and to other's disadvantage. There is honesty but there's > TC> also discretion, both are admirable attributes and serve one well. > > TC> If it were me with the G11 drink spill, I would have likely done the > TC> same as occurred. If asked, I would have told the truth that I spilled > TC> something on it. If not asked, I would figure they did not deem the > TC> reason important and were simply happy to give me a replacement. Had > TC> I been asked, I'd have made the claim that I certainly wouldn't expect > TC> a spill to cause the camera to immediately become non-functional. > TC> Let's see, will it work at SeaWorld when splashed? What about at > TC> Yosemite in the spray of Bridal Veil Falls, a rainy day? > > TC> Do you know how many extended warranties are purchased to cover this > TC> sort of thing that are never used? Now there is a scam. The majority > TC> of them, never utilized, goes straight to the bottom line. A hugh > TC> profit center preying on people's insecurities. > > TC> A little story. > > TC> About eight years ago, through a totally stupid act of my own doing, I > TC> accidentally set off the fire suppression system in my hotel room (I > TC> could make this story very funny if I gave you all the details). > TC> Though buck naked at the time... No... > > TC> I pulled on some pants, threw my laptop bag out into the hallway, and > TC> bounded down two flights of stairs to the office, just as those > TC> nauseating alarms and flashing lights started going off all over the > TC> hotel. > > TC> I told them what I'd done that set the sprinklers off. > > TC> Guess what? > > TC> They did not know how to turn the fire supression system off. > TC> They did not have a procedure manual at the hotel. > TC> They called another hotel in the same chain to see if they knew how. > TC> Yes, but different system. > TC> Fire department calls to see if there's a fire. No there's a flood, > TC> so you needn't come. > > TC> I go back to my room and the maintenance guy is standing in two inches > TC> of water with a shop vac trying to vacum up the water while it's still > TC> coming out of the ceiling. > > TC> I immediately told him to get out of there before he gets himself > electrocuted. > > TC> Still trying to figure out the suppression system, I am running and > TC> relaying information from the office to the maintenance guy back at > TC> the control panel which is in the basement/pool level of the hotel. > TC> Still bare chest, pair of pants, bare feet. > > TC> As I'm running past the pool I see water dripping out of the ceiling > TC> into the pool! From 3 floors above! Oh crap and a bunch of other > TC> things! > > TC> The local Fire Department finally shows up sirens blaring. > > TC> They go down and just as they're about to stem the flow of water, the > TC> system exhausts itself. Apparently, it's a finite pressurized supply. > > TC> So all the water that would have been used for the entire hotel, went > TC> out into my room, over a period of about 30 minutes. Oh crap and a > TC> bunch of other things! > > TC> The hotel graciously assigned me another room. I went and bought dry > TC> clothes and went into work. > > TC> I lurked back in through the side door that evening around 8:00. > TC> Carpets were pulled up all over the place with big blowers running. > > TC> Wow I think, several weeks later, they haven't sued me. > > TC> Not quite that lucky. > > TC> Months later, after having stayed at the hotel for the next four > TC> months, out of a misplaced sense of guilt, I receive a letter. > > TC> It's from the hotel chain's, insurance company's, risk management company. > > TC> They're demanding payment of $27,000 in damages, including my room, > TC> the 3 floors below, and lost income because other hotel residents left > TC> (the alarm system kept malfunctioning and going off intermittently for > TC> the next 8 - 10 hours). > > TC> I finally got some advice and called my home owners insurance to see > TC> if I was in some way covered through it. Yes. So they took up the > TC> litigation in my defense. > > TC> My argument was, that while I was indeed responsible for having set > TC> the system off, I was not responsible for the hotel not knowing how to > TC> control it and turn it off. I would have thought they should be able > TC> to turn it off in under 5 minutes. So I figured I was responsible for > TC> no more than 1/6 of the damages. > > TC> Under Washington State law, a tenant is only responsible for their > TC> room. The arbitrator also agreed with the argument that the hotel > TC> itself was to blame for their incompetence and that the vast majority > TC> of the damage was directly related to that. > > TC> I ended up paying $350. > > TC> Now here's what really gets me. The hotel chain had insurance. We > TC> all know that insurance is just another form of gambling. They take > TC> your money, betting that in the majority of instances, they'll never > TC> have to pay out. In this case they did. But then, instead of figuring > TC> this was one the times they lost the bet, the insurance company used a > TC> risk management firm to try and recover the money. What the heck? They > TC> wanted it both ways. > > TC> How does this story relate to the G11 incident? I guess it showed me > TC> that everything is not always so black and white as some would like to > TC> believe. > > TC> Owner was responsible for spilling a drink. Was he totally responsible > TC> for the camera no longer working? From my viewpoint no. I'd have > TC> thunk the camera was little more impervious than that. > > TC> Tom C. > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
