The diplomatic discussion on using the system to your advantage.

[rushmc 23]

So now you KNOW Walmart treats it's staff and the communities it is in badly

You really (think you) know all don't you.

Oh, and you may wish to do a little research as to how communities view a Walmart after they have been there a year or two
I bet you will be surprised

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[davjohns 1]

Rhys - I quoted your own words from the original post where you acknowledged that what you did was not moral. Now, you ask me to prove to you that what you did was not moral? I read your initial post multiple times. I just reject your underlying premise that your conduct can be justified by someone else's. I believe that individuals are ultimately responsible for their own behavior.

Nobody can 'convince' you, because you have created your own moral relativity. Logical arguments are meaningless to you. Moral relativity is pretty much synonymous with making up the rules as you go.

By the way; insulting the intelligence of others because they can't win a game against you where you make up the rules as you go is pretty immature.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[airtwardo 7]

I challenge you to explain what is immoral about my actions.

Quote

I like unethical better than immoral, and to me anyway...

It's unethical to gain through the use of a product or service without intent of paying for that which is intended to be sold for profit.

Claim loop holes all day long but in the final run, they're not in the business of loaning out merchandise.

It's not really that 'most' people don't have the balls to do it...it's more that they consider it a theft of services 'ethically'.

It's not that Wal-Mart banks on most people bein' to 'shy' to to it...they figure most people are more ethical.

I know talking ethics and Wal-Mart is a stretch...but I think that's why people on here are having a problem with what you see as 'normal'.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[Heatmiser 0]

Kindof a weird analogy, but how is this any different than a fat guy (like MEEEE!!!) going to the all you can eat China Buffet, and taking them to the cleaners. If a companies policies allow for this, then so what? If this kind of behavior is damaging to the company, don't you think they would change their policies? Incidentally, 4 of the top 20 richest people in the world have the last name "Walton". They know how to make money, and if one of their policies were hurting their bottom line, you can bet your ass they would do something about it.

What you say is reflective of your knowledge...HOW ya say it is reflective of your experience. Airtwardo

Someone's going to be spanked! Hopefully, it will be me. Skymama

[Southern_Man 0]

It is different because you are using the buffet policy as they intended--to eat all you want. This is perfectly within the spirit of why they offer it. (Trust me, no matter how much you eat, they aren't losing money on you, either, unless maybe you are an Appalachain Trail thru-hiker so something and probably not even then).

He is using a policy intended to let people purchase things without worry by allowing them to return them if unsatisfied and cynically buying things w/ the intention of returning them--thus renting them for free. He is buying without the intention of actually buying.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Kindof a weird analogy, but how is this any different than a fat guy (like MEEEE!!!) going to the all you can eat China Buffet, and taking them to the cleaners. If a companies policies allow for this, then so what? If this kind of behavior is damaging to the company, don't you think they would change their policies? Incidentally, 4 of the top 20 richest people in the world have the last name "Walton". They know how to make money, and if one of their policies were hurting their bottom line, you can bet your ass they would do something about it.

If you eat it there, that's what the deal is. You're still doing the same thing as everyone else and you're not getting something for free, just maximizing your money.

I normally eat all on my plate, but at a resturant like that, I don't quit unitl I can't finish what is in front of me. Like you, I take all you can eat as a challenge.

Were you to start stuffing your pockets with food to take with you, that's another story as that's not part of the deal.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[airdvr 210]

Quote

Kindof a weird analogy, but how is this any different than a fat guy (like MEEEE!!!) going to the all you can eat China Buffet, and taking them to the cleaners. If a companies policies allow for this, then so what? If this kind of behavior is damaging to the company, don't you think they would change their policies? Incidentally, 4 of the top 20 richest people in the world have the last name "Walton". They know how to make money, and if one of their policies were hurting their bottom line, you can bet your ass they would do something about it.

Actually it would be more like going to the buffet, eating a ton, taking a dump, presenting your feces to the buffet and asking for a refund.

Please don't dent the planet.

Destinations by Roxanne

[sundevil777 102]

Quote

Actually it would be more like going to the buffet, eating a ton, taking a dump, presenting your feces to the buffet and asking for a refund.

Now that is a really crappy analogy

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[Heatmiser 0]

LMFAO!

What you say is reflective of your knowledge...HOW ya say it is reflective of your experience. Airtwardo

Someone's going to be spanked! Hopefully, it will be me. Skymama

[turtlespeed 220]

Quote

LMFAO!

That is some funny stuff right there!

I notice that all y'all got nice little responses . . . but my points fell on deaf ears. Maybe it was the DZ reference.
Perhaps his ethics (thank you Twardo) only aply when its HIS bottom line that is affected.

Discuss

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[RackJR 0]

Quote

To answer your cheeky question, I beleive they do not need to take advantage of their saff and their communities to maintain dominance over the market, if a company is doing well, its staff should be doing well also,that is morally correct.

You don't see the irony here? Is wal-mart breaking the law somehow? Or, are they using the system to their advantage? Did you break the law, or use the system to your advantage?

You condemn them for the exact same moral flexibility that you employ here. How do you see them as an evil corporation, but yourself as an honest and moral individual?

Say what you mean. Do what you say.

[rhys 0]

Quote

I like unethical better than immoral, and to me anyway...

It's unethical to gain through the use of a product or service without intent of paying for that which is intended to be sold for profit.

Claim loop holes all day long but in the final run, they're not in the business of loaning out merchandise.

It's not really that 'most' people don't have the balls to do it...it's more that they consider it a theft of services 'ethically'.

It's not that Wal-Mart banks on most people bein' to 'shy' to to it...they figure most people are more ethical.

I know talking ethics and Wal-Mart is a stretch...but I think that's why people on here are having a problem with what you see as 'normal'.

This is a great reply and it is about time someone actually had an intellegent conversation around here.

They are not in the business of loaning merchandise out, they are in the business of selling it. They are the largest retail chain in the world and one of thier policies allowes potential customers to 'trial the goods,no questiones asked'.

Can yo refer me to the section in their policy that stipulates that the intent for taking the goods must be to purchase them?

If you can do that I will admit fault, and I will think twice about ever doing it again. The polocy was not presented to me in this way by any persons other than those the have expressed concern in this discussion and the two that preceeded.

i suggest I was taking the goods on a trial basis garanteed with a refundable deposit of the total of the value of the goods. As long as they are returned in new condition and with the origional packaging, if I dd not want them, then i did not have to purchase them.

I truly appreciate your rational and concise reply and look forward to resolvng the issue of whether or not this conduct is reasonable.

As far as I was aware, I was allowed to trial the goods for 90 days if I wanted. I only had them a couple of weeks. I decided I did not want to keep the goods as they were not suitable for what they were advertised to be suitable for.

3 seasons in New Zealand is a little more intense than 3 seasons in norcal. I would be better off spending $500 than $150 or whatever it was, I cannot truthfully remeber the total amout but it was less than $200 for a family tent and air mattress, seemed too cheap but they said it was good on the packet?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

You don't see the irony here? Is wal-mart breaking the law somehow? Or, are they using the system to their advantage? Did you break the law, or use the system to your advantage?

You condemn them for the exact same moral flexibility that you employ here. How do you see them as an evil corporation, but yourself as an honest and moral individual?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you chimed in on the conversation about here somewhere, missed a whole lot of stuff.

Wal-mart are responsable for many illegal activities that damage its surrounding economies and residents more than anyone is willing to admit. they have the best buying power and the largest market share yet they ripp off their own staff and counter sue people that legally aquired compestation from them.

If you do a little research, you will see that I am far from the bad guy.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Well, that would be correct if it were true.

That is one of the purposes of the return policy.

But that wasn't why you did what you did.

You clearly stated that you intended to use them and return them.

You clearly stated that you were doing this to cause harm (a very small amount, but still harm) to WalMart.
You justified it because of how bad WalMart's policies and practices are.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

i suggest I was taking the goods on a trial basis garanteed with a refundable deposit of the total of the value of the goods

You did not take the goods on a trail basis. A trail basis would be you take something to try it out for a period of time to decide if you liked it or not.

You fully intended to return it whether you liked it or not. This is not a trail basis. Spin it anyway you want to make yourself feel better but you are wrong. And to use your own words "I will agree that it is morally incorrect to do so".

[rhys 0]

Quote

You clearly stated that you intended to use them and return them.

You clearly stated that you were doing this to cause harm (a very small amount, but still harm) to WalMart.
You justified it because of how bad WalMart's policies and practices are.

And I have clearly stated that the goods were not as good as they were advertised, I knew this when I got them and i knew they would not be as good as they say, I have to admit they were pretty damned good for the price, but not 3 seasons. i don't like wet shit, i also knew it wouldn;t matter for the time i need it for.

i also clearly stated that i thought they use this policy to assure thier customers about the cheap crap the send out the door...

I clearly stated many things you cearly seem to have ignored.

Ever heard that song; 'it never rains in california', or whatever it is? They are not far wrong!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

You fully intended to return it whether you liked it or not. This is not a trail basis. Spin it anyway you want to make yourself feel better but you are wrong. And to use your own words "I will agree that it is morally incorrect to do so".

'Timmay'


So when you trial something you are obliged to buy it?

Maybe they were sure I would change my mind, you know, I almost did at one stage, until it got windy!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

Quote

I base my reactions on what you state are your moral values. You freely admit to taking certain actions, you bragged about them. You invited comment about those actions.

One thing I am not doing is bragging, I was ridiculed for a simple action that was favourable to me and slightly unfavourable for the world’s largest retail chain.

I have been ridiculed before and I will be ridiculed again, correct me if i am wrong but one should stand up for what they believe in and I believe I did no wrong.

You and everybody (well almost everybody eh Tardo) that has felt the urge to insult me or accuse me, fail to answer the very question the post you are replying to CLEARLY points out.

After which, you have the audacity to call me a fraud in the very same reply.

You clearly do not get it!

I suggest you work on you comprehension.

All I am pointing out is that cannot explain what is wrong with what I did.

You can say it is immoral all you like, but for that to be backed up, you have to explain why or how.

Quote

You, more than likely, were hoping that we would all jump on your little broken wheeled band wagon and stand up for or against whatever it is that you are trying to build yourself up on. What was that? That it is ok to comit fraud? That is how it ios and was presented.

I was pointing out that you are basing you beliefs on peer pressure and not reality, you so easily say I am a fraud, but you cannot explain.

Why don't you even try?

You cheer the tardmeister for doing so becasue you failed yoursef, you hold the hope in your peers and not yourself.

Quote

In reality, there are really more people that have a grasp of what the right thing to do is, as opposed to those that don't. It has been taught to us from when we were babies. I just hope that you didn't miss the REST of the lessons.

So everything your mummy and daddy teach you is the correct thing to do?

In a perfect world buddy, this is reality.

That is why we have laws, explain what little rule your mummy and daddy taught you that I managed to miss out on, seriously, I am intrigued

Quote

As I repsponded before, you OBVIOUSLY do NOT know me. I would venture to guess that if I did meet you, I would likely ask you something along the lines of, "SO . . . which Walmart you are abusing THIS time or have you moved on to bigger and better yet, you know how these things escalate." ,and it would go from there. I call it like I see it.

Then I would reply to you, as I have done in here, and you would be exposed as the fraud you are.

I am allowed to call you a fraud because I suggest you are trying to be someone you are not. I suggest you're trying to be the almighty online good guy.

In reality you wouldn't have the guts to say that to my face, as you know you would get the very same answer you would here, I would wait anxiously for your reply and when you would inevitably fail to produce anything. I would mock you so hard and you would have no other choice but be humiliated.

If you reply to anything can you please reply to the following, so I can grow a little?

If you are so concerned about my actions that you would come and confront me about it personally, what are your thoughts on Wal-Mart’s conduct as far as their tactics on maintaining market dominance?

If you are so rifled up about me using a tent on a trial basis, and returning it in good faith and receiving my money back with jovial and respectful demeanour, I would like to know what level of hatred you have for Wal-mart.

Have you any clue of what sort of conduct they are responsible for?

Not to compare their actions to mine, but to know what your thoughts on their actions are. If you are so wound up about me doing a petty thing like that, suerly your impulsive attitude towards, evildoers' will carry over to other fields and individuals as well.

Some continuity is needed if you are going to play 'the good guy'.

I'm the bad guy in your books remember! bad guys do bad stuff, what do good guys do?

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

• Quote

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

You clearly stated that you intended to use them and return them.

You clearly stated that you were doing this to cause harm (a very small amount, but still harm) to WalMart.
You justified it because of how bad WalMart's policies and practices are.

And I have clearly stated that the goods were not as good as they were advertised, I knew this when I got them and i knew they would not be as good as they say, I have to admit they were pretty damned good for the price, but not 3 seasons. i don't like wet shit, i also knew it wouldn;t matter for the time i need it for.

i also clearly stated that i thought they use this policy to assure thier customers about the cheap crap the send out the door...

I clearly stated many things you cearly seem to have ignored.

Ever heard that song; 'it never rains in california', or whatever it is? They are not far wrong!

You didn't say anything about the quality of the goods or the way that they were advertised until the post I replied to. You stated in the OP:

Quote

As many have suggested, it seems to be morally incorrect to return goods after you have purchased them, if you do so intentionally.

That is what the discussion is about and I will agree that it is morally incorrect to do so in cases where the provider is an ethical entity.

In the case at hand however we are talking about Walmart.

My arguement was (and is) that doing it is wrong period.

Using WalMart's "evilness" as justification for your "morally incorrect" behavior is just that.

Justification.

I don't like WalMart. I choose not to do any business there.

But your behavior is supporting them.

You are helping the "evil entity" that is WalMart. You helped their foot traffic numbers by going in there twice (buy and return trips).

You helped their sales numbers and transaction numbers by buying the stuff the first time (and a ~$200 sale is a pretty big purchase).

You probably didn't hurt the bottom line any because if the stuff was still in good condition they probably just sold it to some other customer.

How about that Rhys?

You conspired with WalMart to sell used camping gear as new.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

You fully intended to return it whether you liked it or not. This is not a trail basis. Spin it anyway you want to make yourself feel better but you are wrong. And to use your own words "I will agree that it is morally incorrect to do so".

'Timmay'


So when you trial something you are obliged to buy it?

Maybe they were sure I would change my mind, you know, I almost did at one stage, until it got windy!

If trialing goods were their policy wouldn't they stipulate something along the lines of take anything you want, if you like it THEN pay for it?

The policy states 'Our goal is to satisfy our Customers...'

You're not a customer, you removed a product from the shelf which you used & returned without ever having the intent of paying for.

IF you would have said something like "I bought a tent from Wallyworld that was such a piece of junk I returned it." Then I don't think we'd be having the discussion.

But your intent was to 'gain' use of the product with no intent
of making the store whole...thus the ethical question.

On the other hand, you are honest enough to clearly state your intentions and actions on here, so you're not a liar...which would be a moral question.

~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

[timmyfitz 0]

Quote

Quote

You fully intended to return it whether you liked it or not. This is not a trail basis. Spin it anyway you want to make yourself feel better but you are wrong. And to use your own words "I will agree that it is morally incorrect to do so".

'Timmay'


So when you trial something you are obliged to buy it?

Never said that or implied that. Just you making shit up.

Maybe they were sure I would change my mind, you know, I almost did at one stage, until it got windy!

Like I said "Spin it anyway you want to make yourself feel better but you are wrong".

[Bolas 5]

Quote

And I have clearly stated that the goods were not as good as they were advertised, I knew this when I got them and i knew they would not be as good as they say, I have to admit they were pretty damned good for the price, but not 3 seasons. i don't like wet shit, i also knew it wouldn;t matter for the time i need it for.

Had you returned the tent once you discovered for sure it was not going to meet your needs (both future and immediate), that would have been fine. However, it did meet your needs, at least as far as for that trip.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[champu 1]

Quote

Ever heard that song; 'it never rains in california', or whatever it is? They are not far wrong!

Seems it never rains in southern California
Seems I've often heard that kinda talk before
It never rains in California, but girl, don't they warn ya?
It pours, man, it pours.

[rhys 0]

Quote

Like I said "Spin it anyway you want to make yourself feel better but you are wrong".

because?

tick, tock, tick, tock!

I have given you my feelings and suggested what you may think by my thought process. Yet you are reluctant to expose you beliefs in the fear that you will be weakened by doing so. you just want to jump on an opprotunity to attack me, because that is waht you do, you attack people.

I have witnessd you do it to me and many others on multipule occasions, you don't seem to realise that I understand completely your motive for participating in this converstaion and am not pointing out to you or anyone other than myself that my assertions are correct.

You in fact prove me right, because this was, as i clearly pointed out, and excersise.

I don't doubt that it is possible to prove me wrong, I am agnostic and openminded by nature. I certainly question things before making my decision on whether to beleive them or not. This is something you could benifut from. You cannot beleive everything you have been to told, and you have the right to make your own decision.

I cannot argue that with you you have the right to think what you want as do I, buth we are both also responsable for the repercussion of our actions and have to be realistic about what is right and what is wrong, but you simply accuse me while not explaining why.

I'm bored of you!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[rhys 0]

Quote

If trialing goods were their policy wouldn't they stipulate something along the lines of take anything you want, if you like it THEN pay for it?

Their policy is 'no questions asked' as far as i am aware, can you show m otherwise?

that does not seem to have any exclusions as far as i can see?

Do you think, maybe, that the employee was simply apathetic and failed to do her job, or?

I told them i did not eant them anymore. what is it that I don't understand?

Quote

You're not a customer, you removed a product from the shelf which you used & returned without ever having the intent of paying for.

I had purchased stuff from them before, and did so after, how am I not a customer?

Just because I dislike thier practices does not mean i will not ever shop there, i would prefer not to but I have also never pretended to be perfect. Sometimes it is is just too much effort or too late to do otherwise.

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix