This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Drop by and say hi! (Recycle Bin)
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Lombax
Sexual candy panda >>>>>>>> all of the above.
How about no.
This is Candy Panda.
Post by
Rankkor
One brand of
milk
in Slovakia has "
warning for allergics, this product contains: milk
" written on the side of the box.
Lot's of products do that in Sweden as well; makes one wonder what the average IQ is these days.
I went to the usual pet store to buy a new toy for my cat Bianca. Just then I saw this bag that said:
"Cat Toy (for cats)"
ya know, just in case you didn't wanted to buy the cat toy for dogs. On top of that, on the back it said again Cat toy. and a little behind said "not for children"
We get it, its for cats, now STFU. >.>
I swear, these companies must think we have some sort of brain dam---gama----gamama-------dama------damage.
Post by
Thror
Dude, if I was a product designer, and I could get away with it, the items I would design would be covered in redundant self descriptions too.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I look at it this way- civil cases for anything other than small claims are decided by a jury. A jury, statistically, is made up of half people of less than average intelligence. More than that, if you buy into the idea that intelligent people are better at getting out of it.
Many of the people who make decisions about whether or not a company needs to legally cater to stupid people to keep them from hurting themselves are often stupid people who would be prone to doing things like that without a warning not to. Hence, the moron who irons his shirt on his body, takes the hairdryer in the shower to save time, or thinks a cape should help him fly, wins money from companies who were unable to anticipate that level of stupid. They have to put dumb warnings on everything because the people who they have to argue that it's common sense to may have no common sense.
Also (at least in the US) people are so litigious that they'll sure for anything- and because of the above issue plus the portion of the population that wants to "stick it to the man" and thinks the evil corporations should pay money to the poor, impoverished common man at every opportunity, they often win on stupid, stupid things. It is not worth millions of dollars when you spill coffee on yourself. It is not worth millions of dollars when your drunk ass walks into a glass door and breaks your nose- and it certainly is not worth millions of dollars in "loss of service" to your wife that you broke your nose (this is a case that my step-mom knows the morons personally). So people have to protect themselves from stupidity and manipulation of the legal system.
Post by
909566
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
Yeah now a days, they have to put warnings on everything, since people are so sue happy.
Heh, look at Weird Al's 'I'll Sue You' song; a lot of the examples he uses are things people have tried.
Post by
909566
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Azazel
It's the same problem the US has with guns - the problem is far too big to stop now.
Post by
Thror
It's leaps and bounds different over here. Suing is a lot less common. Might be because suing something actually costs you quite a lot of money and time, so noone bothers. The only time someone sues someone is when there is some seriously big scam brewing, or so. The curious cases from the US are read as jokes here, and give a lot of people a very negative opinion of Americans. It is possible that people are not so trigger happy with suing because it is generally not socially acceptable here too. Peer pressure can be a factor.
I know of someone who sued a restaurant because he could (somehow) prove that he caught salmonella from food served there. That would be about it for court cases where a company had to pay an individual here.
Doesn't mean that we do not get super idiot proof manuals though, mostly because most of them are simply Slovak translations of manuals made for the US. They can be hilarious. And to add to the previous thing I said, if I could be a manual writer, and I could get away with it, I would include warnings for the most absurd things in every manual. Harmless satire is one of my favourite types of humour.
Post by
Adamsm
Lol; just found Noxy in the Beta.
Post by
Rankkor
It's leaps and bounds different over here. Suing is a lot less common. Might be because suing something actually costs you quite a lot of money and time, so noone bothers. The only time someone sues someone is when there is some seriously big scam brewing, or so. The curious cases from the US are read as jokes here, and give a lot of people a very negative opinion of Americans.
Pretty much this.
Legal fees are ridiculously high over here, and the judicial process is mind-bogglingly SLOOOOOOOW. If you want to speed it up, you need to grease a lot of palms, which of course means, More money.
By rule of thumb, if you can sue someone over here, you don't really need the money, you just wanna make a point. Which is why nobody does it. The non-rich can't afford it, and the rich are too cheap to blow away millions just to teach some poor sap who's boss. (When paying up some thugs gets the same message, its a lot cheaper, and a lot faster)
Post by
ElhonnaDS
In the US, small-claims suits (anything under 4000-6000 dollars, depending on the state) are pretty easy to file. Neither person needs a lawyer, I'm pretty sure there's no jury, and the filing fees are relatively small. People use this all the time over small injuries, defamation on facebook, disputes over cleaning deposits and used car sales, etc.
For large lawsuits, a lot of law firms, if they feel a case is winnable, charge a percentage of the winnings rather than a fee up front. Meaning that it costs people nothing to sue a corporation, an insurance company, or even a small business, because if they win, it comes out of the winnings, and if they lose, they don't have to pay anything.
Hence, lawsuits are extremely easy to file here for civil claims.
What's sad is that the place where people really get into the position where they can't afford a legal battle is family court. Civil is as I said above, and for criminal trials the costs are covered by the state (even the defense lawyer if the person on trial has no money). But family court, everyone needs to keep paying lawyers, and it gets expensive. And if one parent refuses to allow the other the court ordered visitation, it can take many trips to court and a lot of money to fix that. A lot of times, parents can't get their visitation, even though they've been given it by the courts, because the other parent drags them into family court until they can't afford it anymore.
Post by
Rankkor
In the US, small-claims suits (anything under 4000-6000 dollars, depending on the state) are pretty easy to file. Neither person needs a lawyer, I'm pretty sure there's no jury, and the filing fees are relatively small. People use this all the time over small injuries, defamation on facebook, disputes over cleaning deposits and used car sales, etc.
For large lawsuits, a lot of law firms, if they feel a case is winnable, charge a percentage of the winnings rather than a fee up front. Meaning that it costs people nothing to sue a corporation, an insurance company, or even a small business, because if they win, it comes out of the winnings, and if they lose, they don't have to pay anything.
Hence, lawsuits are extremely easy to file here for civil claims.
What's sad is that the place where people really get into the position where they can't afford a legal battle is family court. Civil is as I said above, and for criminal trials the costs are covered by the state (even the defense lawyer if the person on trial has no money). But family court, everyone needs to keep paying lawyers, and it gets expensive. And if one parent refuses to allow the other the court ordered visitation, it can take many trips to court and a lot of money to fix that. A lot of times, parents can't get their visitation, even though they've been given it by the courts, because the other parent drags them into family court until they can't afford it anymore.
which is why I believe (no offense please) that the legal system in the US is a laughable joke.
Bad as it is over here, at least you can't just sue someone because they sold you a cup of coffee that was just too hot.
Post by
Interest
In the US, small-claims suits (anything under 4000-6000 dollars, depending on the state) are pretty easy to file. Neither person needs a lawyer, I'm pretty sure there's no jury, and the filing fees are relatively small. People use this all the time over small injuries, defamation on facebook, disputes over cleaning deposits and used car sales, etc.
For large lawsuits, a lot of law firms, if they feel a case is winnable, charge a percentage of the winnings rather than a fee up front. Meaning that it costs people nothing to sue a corporation, an insurance company, or even a small business, because if they win, it comes out of the winnings, and if they lose, they don't have to pay anything.
Hence, lawsuits are extremely easy to file here for civil claims.
What's sad is that the place where people really get into the position where they can't afford a legal battle is family court. Civil is as I said above, and for criminal trials the costs are covered by the state (even the defense lawyer if the person on trial has no money). But family court, everyone needs to keep paying lawyers, and it gets expensive. And if one parent refuses to allow the other the court ordered visitation, it can take many trips to court and a lot of money to fix that. A lot of times, parents can't get their visitation, even though they've been given it by the courts, because the other parent drags them into family court until they can't afford it anymore.
That's good to know...just in case...
Post by
ElhonnaDS
That's good to know...just in case...
Baby mamma drama?
Post by
Adamsm
Psh, not from him; probably divorcing the parents or some other family member.
Post by
gamerunknown
Turns out the Pokémon theme song writer did a skit for
Ron Paul
...
I wonder how many of Paul's fans check out
the other songs
on his channel
.
Post by
Thror
I wonder how many of Paul's fans check out
the other songs
on his channel.
bwahahahaha
on his channel
.
That guy is hilarious.
Post by
952951
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Pwntiff
http://www.wowhead.com/reputation
Mostly they come with age.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.