Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Age ain't nothin' but a numba! I don't really consider myself old. I have no idea what I consider old. 547? According to wiki, icing became a thing in 2010, so I was 25 or so. Young, just not young enough to pick up on the fad! I thought we were around the same age, though?
Haha we are, I'm just a few years older than you.
I went to college at an older age (30) so I'm used to always being called old!
Post by itrainmonkeys on Apr 10, 2017 11:19:56 GMT -5
Just got tickets to see comedy bang bang live in NYC. Been dying to see them live for years but could never work out the dates or they sold out fast. Can't wait.
1. I still love buying smirnoff ice and hiding it during big parties/weekend getaways. or people's birthdays. we iced our friend jerry 11 times on his birthday last month. hahaha
Yeah, see when we were young, it was just an average drink. You picked up a pack of Smirnoff Ice like you would pick up any beer. It wasn't yet a gag game. People actually drank them on the reg because they wanted to and not because someone tricked them into it. By the time icing was a thing, I was already #old.
there were definitely a good handful of instances in my 16-18 year range where I loooooved smirnoff ice too I was partial to the green apple and razz flavors, though
Yeah, see when we were young, it was just an average drink. You picked up a pack of Smirnoff Ice like you would pick up any beer. It wasn't yet a gag game. People actually drank them on the reg because they wanted to and not because someone tricked them into it. By the time icing was a thing, I was already #old.
there were definitely a good handful of instances in my 16-18 year range where I loooooved smirnoff ice too I was partial to the green apple and razz flavors, though
My offensive/argument shitstorm random thought of the day can't stay silent.
I don't feel sorry for that guy that got dragged off the plane. United went through the full procedure and tried to get a volunteer to stay behind for money, when that doesn't work they have to select people. Generally its a random selection of those that are easiest to reroute. He was told to get off by the flight attendants and then they brought the cops. He still refused to get off. What are they supposed to do say never mind we'll just let you stay on? Ya they could have been gentler, but i also don;t necessarily think the roughness was on purpose. It's hard enough to drag a 20lbs backpack from the window seat to the aisle let alone a resisting full grown man.
Ya it sucks that airlines overbook, but it's the way things go. Should every airline leave seats open on every plane just in case they need to relocate crew members and then pass on the additional costs in increased ticket prices?
My offensive/argument shitstorm random thought of the day can't stay silent.
I don't feel sorry for that guy that got dragged off the plane. United went through the full procedure and tried to get a volunteer to stay behind for money, when that doesn't work they have to select people. Generally its a random selection of those that are easiest to reroute. He was told to get off by the flight attendants and then they brought the cops. He still refused to get off. What are they supposed to do say never mind we'll just let you stay on? Ya they could have been gentler, but i also don;t necessarily think the roughness was on purpose. It's hard enough to drag a 20lbs backpack from the window seat to the aisle let alone a resisting full grown man.
Ya it sucks that airlines overbook, but it's the way things go. Should every airline leave seats open on every plane just in case they need to relocate crew members and then pass on the additional costs in increased ticket prices?
I pretty much agree. I think it's possible for situations to arise where both parties are in the wrong, and this is one of them. There are things United could have done differently. They could have upped the bid for people to leave, they could have rented a car for their employees to drive four and a half hours, which is not very far, they could have not allowed passengers to board before alerting them that some of them needed to leave, and so on. They handled the situation very poorly.
But the response from this guy: that he's a doctor and he has patients to see so he's too special to leave the plane strikes me as very entitled. His time is more valuable than anyone else's and he's a special person. Sorry, but no. It's their plane and they picked him at random. He needs to be a grown-up and leave the plane on his own. Shit happens.
Post by wannaberoo'ing on Apr 10, 2017 17:59:16 GMT -5
Ahahaha- awesome. A 69 year old guy gets beat up and bloodied by the orders of a huge corporation who is only trying to look out for their greedy and self-serving interests but it is this paying customer's fault that he got assaulted and drug off a plane??? Really? Huge corporations have been raking their customers through the coals for years now, Comcast, major airlines, you name it, at the expense of the customer and the little guy and you guys are defending the asshole unethical monopolies who feel like they can do whatever they want (criminal and unethical) just to make a profit. Nope. United could have and should have dealt with their fuck up in much better way than dragging a man off a plane. Outrageous.
Well if you're blaming United for the guy getting bloodied that's even less fair, it was a cop employed by the airport, not anyone employed by United that did that.
Ya it sucks that airlines overbook, but it's the way things go.
Maybe that's not the way things should go? Maybe a change to standard operating procedure if it requires them to force people off flights because they overbooked.
Should every airline leave seats open on every plane just in case they need to relocate crew members and then pass on the additional costs in increased ticket prices?
I really don't know a viable solution but to force paying customers off of the flight because THEY needed the seats and overbooked just looks bad. "We fucked up. We need to resort to violence in order to solve our problem" is a terrible precedent to set. Was there seriously no other solution to this mess? I know they offered money and people didn't want to take it....why not offer more money until someone finds it worthy? Was there absolutely no other flight that the crew could have taken? I haven't read up all the specific details so forgive me if thee's more to it that I'm missing.
The whole thing is a mess but I wouldn't say that the company is in the right here. They fucked up, they should deal with the consequences.
If you paid good money for a concert and got in early and waited for a rail spot and held it but were told immediately before the show that a few people would have to leave the rail to make room for the venue's hired photographers how would you react? Now let's say you resisted this set of events since it's not your fault for the venue's mess. If you got physically removed/forced out then it would probably leave a bad taste in your mouth and the others who witnessed it.
Obviously this is a reaching "what if" scenario since I know you and know you likely wouldn't let a situation escalate to violent means (nor would this situation likely come up) but I do feel like there's more blame to be put on United than there is for a randomly selected guy (who....if his story is true....was on his way to see patients the next morning. Don't know if that was verified or just an excuse).
In the end, I do feel bad for the guy. The way he was treated is no way I want to see anyone treated simply because a company made a mistake. I likely would have taken an offer simply because I likely wouldn't have had anywhere urgent to be/could handle a delay but I wouldn't expect many others to do the same.
Well if you're blaming United for the guy getting bloodied that's even less fair, it was a cop employed by the airport, not anyone employed by United that did that.
They escalated the situation and called for security to intervene. That is on them and the security. They allowed violence to happen and a man to get injured because they needed his bought and paid for seat, which is fraud. This shouldn't be allowed to happen, period.
Well if you're blaming United for the guy getting bloodied that's even less fair, it was a cop employed by the airport, not anyone employed by United that did that.
They escalated the situation and called for security to intervene. That is on them and the security. They allowed violence to happen and a man to get injured because they needed his bought and paid for seat, which is fraud. This shouldn't be allowed to happen, period.
It's not like he wasn't going to be compensated. I don't know what it is with United but with Southwest its 300$ plus the cost of your flight for voluntarily giving up your seat and 500 + cost for involuntary.
It's worth noting that disobeying the orders of the flight crew on a plane is a federal crime.
Physically removing him was not even close to the first option, but if he refuses what choice do they have?
Honoring the ticket he paid for and figuring out another solution to their fuck up seems better. It came down to "WE NEED THIS SO WE WILL TAKE THIS" even though it was them overbooking a flight. Again, though, I don't know all the specifics so I'm not really up in arms about this. I've learned too well in the past few years that people getting so overworked and pissed off about stories immediately before the details actually drop just leads to unnecessary stress and outrage. For all we know he's a loser who had no patients and nowhere to be but just wanted to remain on his flight.
What does bother me is the fact that United is spinning this as an irate customer who "fell" while being taken off the flight. Anyone watching the video sees the cops (accidentally....didn't seem intentional) slamming his head against the next armrest, leading to the blood on his face. But hey.....corporations being soulless and trying to avoid taking the blame is standard so I'm not surprised
It's worth noting that disobeying the orders of the flight crew on a plane is a federal crime.
Physically removing him was not even close to the first option, but if he refuses what choice do they have?
Removing someone from a plane for being a threat and a danger is one thing. Forcibly removing someone from a plane that did not voluntarily give up his seat and is not a threat to anyone is completely different. This is outrageous and following guidelines, no one volunteered to give up their seats and I don't think an airline should be able to board anyone and then come on the plane and start physically ejecting people. This causes an endless domino of bad effects- everyone on the plane is even more upset, plane is delayed even more, the ones being removed from the plane are pissed and likely to get belligerent (understandably so).
They escalated the situation and called for security to intervene. That is on them and the security. They allowed violence to happen and a man to get injured because they needed his bought and paid for seat, which is fraud. This shouldn't be allowed to happen, period.
It's not like he wasn't going to be compensated. I don't know what it is with United but with Southwest its 300$ plus the cost of your flight for voluntarily giving up your seat and 500 + cost for involuntary.
United was offering 400 dollars and then when there were no takers bumped it up to 800.
It's worth noting that disobeying the orders of the flight crew on a plane is a federal crime.
Physically removing him was not even close to the first option, but if he refuses what choice do they have?
Removing someone from a plane for being a threat and a danger is one thing. Forcibly removing someone from a plane that did not voluntarily give up his seat and is not a threat to anyone is completely different. This is outrageous and following guidelines, no one volunteered to give up their seats and I don't think an airline should be able to board anyone and then come on the plane and start physically ejecting people. This causes an endless domino of bad effects- everyone on the plane is even more upset, plane is delayed even more, the ones being removed from the plane are pissed and likely to get belligerent (understandably so).
But we need flight attendants on the other side of the country! Not getting them there is going to cost us money! What? Bloodying a passenger and dragging him off the plane is going to cost us millions? How so?
Not that it will matter to you, but if you read details of your airline ticket that you agree to when you purchase it, it does in fact say you can be removed from a flight involuntarily for any reason with compensation and new accommodations.
This something you agree to when you purchase a ticket
This situation arises all the time. The only difference between this and the other situations is the guy that refused to leave.
No, actually situations like this don't arise all the time. People usually volunteer to give up their seats and take the compensation at the gate before they board the plane. Airlines don't come onto a plane after people are boarded and start ejecting folks. Big difference here. If an airline can't get volunteers, sometimes the staff are rerouted.
Not everyone has the flexibility in their schedule either to volunteer and take a later flight.
Not that it will matter to you, but if you read details of your airline ticket that you agree to when you purchase it, it does in fact say you can be removed from a flight involuntarily for any reason with compensation and new accommodations.
This something you agree to when you purchase a ticket
And, not that any of the other good points I am making seem to matter to you either as you keep defending the fact a person got assaulted and bloodied and drug off a fucking plane because corporation said they needed his bought and paid for seat that he didn't volunteer to give up. I guess maybe if it happened to you or someone you loved, someone who really didn't want to be ejected off a plane that they had already boarded, you may feel differently? Like where is your goddamn empathy? Jesus, a guy gets assaulted and drug off a plane, whether you think he should have just given up his seat, and you are like "he deserved it." Fuck that, seriously.
I've been on at least 3-4 flights in the last decade or so where someone was involuntarily rerouted because of overbooking. Never had they been seated, but I don't think that really changes anything
This situation arises all the time. The only difference between this and the other situations is the guy that refused to leave.
No, actually situations like this don't arise all the time. People usually volunteer to give up their seats and take the compensation at the gate before they board the plane. Airlines don't come onto a plane after people are boarded and start ejecting folks. Big difference here. If an airline can't get volunteers, sometimes the staff are rerouted.
Not everyone has the flexibility in their schedule either to volunteer and take a later flight.
Situations where flights are overbooked or seats are needed for employees? Yes. Those happen all the time.
And yes, United should have handled this better. That doesn't mean it is some great injustice that this guy did the toddler slouch when he was asked to leave the plane. All the other passengers that were shrieking about how messed up it was while he was getting dragged off? Guess what, if any single one of them had volunteered it wouldn't have happened. It doesn't take everyone having the flexibility. It takes one person deciding not to be stubborn and taking the money to get off.
Post by itrainmonkeys on Apr 10, 2017 18:27:08 GMT -5
I'm still waiting for more details, really. Were their other possible options to take? Was this guy legitimately on his way to helping patients? Was there more to it before cameras started recording?
I did see some good comments online pointing out how this situation shares similarities to a lot of other (admittedly, worse) situations in this country where if we could just take a moment and wait and figure out a solution that works for everyone instead of just kneejerk reacting and pushing forward action because "we need to speed this along" is felt. A lot of times we see "act first and ask questions later" cause problems like this (and much worse).
There are still details to come out. Like I said, I am annoyed by the "spin" of this with it being about an irate customer falling when we clearly see in the video he's yanked out of his seat and not just simply falling and injuring himself.
Not that it will matter to you, but if you read details of your airline ticket that you agree to when you purchase it, it does in fact say you can be removed from a flight involuntarily for any reason with compensation and new accommodations.
This something you agree to when you purchase a ticket
And, not that any of the other good points I am making seem to matter to you either as you keep defending the fact a person got assaulted and bloodied and drug off a fucking plane because corporation said they needed his bought and paid for seat that he didn't volunteer to give up. I guess maybe if it happened to you or someone you loved, someone who really didn't want to be ejected off a plane that they had already boarded, you may feel differently? Like where is your goddamn empathy? Jesus, a guy gets assaulted and drug off a plane, whether you think he should have just given up his seat, and you are like "he deserved it." Fuck that, seriously.
There is a difference between me not feeling sorry for him and saying he deserved it.
Clearly avoiding injuring him would have been preferable. I have empathy for that, but there are other involved too worthy of empathy including the other affected passengers and the staff and police that are just enforcing both airline policy and federal law.
And yes, United should have handled this better. That doesn't mean it is some great injustice that this guy did the toddler slouch when he was asked to leave the plane. All the other passengers that were shrieking about how messed up it was while he was getting dragged off? Guess what, if any single one of them had volunteered it wouldn't have happened. It doesn't take everyone having the flexibility. It takes one person deciding not to be stubborn and taking the money to get off.
I did see this being shared a bunch when this story was being discussed.
By the time the physical altercation began to occur maybe the people nearby were too shocked to react? Maybe worried that if they stood up/called attention to themselves then they, too, would be dragged off the plane violently?
I don't know. I really don't. I also don't know how I'd react in this exact situation. I probably wouldn't have really wanted to get off the flight originally but by the time this guy was being manhandled by police I may not want to raise my voice and step in.
Again, waiting on more details. I do think it's sad that it reached that point, though. Why couldn't United raise the compensation more? Are there legal reasons for doing so? What other options did they have? Were these four crew members absolutely needed and more important than paying customers? I did see some talk about them needing to be sent wherever they were going so as not to delay hundreds of others wherever they were heading so I am not sure what the extent of the entire situation is.
And yes, United should have handled this better. That doesn't mean it is some great injustice that this guy did the toddler slouch when he was asked to leave the plane. All the other passengers that were shrieking about how messed up it was while he was getting dragged off? Guess what, if any single one of them had volunteered it wouldn't have happened. It doesn't take everyone having the flexibility. It takes one person deciding not to be stubborn and taking the money to get off.
Again, waiting on more details. I do think it's sad that it reached that point, though. Why couldn't United raise the compensation more? Are there legal reasons for doing so? What other options did they have? Were these four crew members absolutely needed and more important than paying customers? I did see some talk about them needing to be sent wherever they were going so as not to delay hundreds of others wherever they were heading so I am not sure what the extent of the entire situation is.
This last time I voluntarily gave up my spot on a southwest flight I was talking to the gate agent about it a bit and the regulations on the money they give out are very controlled, not only are the amounts regulated on a corporate level, but the gate agents themselves can get in trouble if they rebook someone and give them the compensation and then people no show and there are open seats.
Again, waiting on more details. I do think it's sad that it reached that point, though. Why couldn't United raise the compensation more? Are there legal reasons for doing so? What other options did they have? Were these four crew members absolutely needed and more important than paying customers? I did see some talk about them needing to be sent wherever they were going so as not to delay hundreds of others wherever they were heading so I am not sure what the extent of the entire situation is.
This last time I voluntarily gave up my spot on a southwest flight I was talking to the gate agent about it a bit and the regulations on the money they give out are very controlled, not only are the amounts regulated on a corporate level, but the gate agents themselves can get in trouble if they rebook someone and give them the compensation and then people no show and there are open seats.
Fair point.....though I'm sure if they were able to up the compensation money it would cost less than the money they're spending on P.R. backlash and a potential lawsuit. But hindsight is 20/20 and they probably weren't expecting this to blow up as much as it has.
This last time I voluntarily gave up my spot on a southwest flight I was talking to the gate agent about it a bit and the regulations on the money they give out are very controlled, not only are the amounts regulated on a corporate level, but the gate agents themselves can get in trouble if they rebook someone and give them the compensation and then people no show and there are open seats.
Fair point.....though I'm sure if they were able to up the compensation money it would cost less than the money they're spending on P.R. backlash and a potential lawsuit. But hindsight is 20/20 and they probably weren't expecting this to blow up as much as it has.
I'm guessing they take it out of the gate agent's hands because as soon as people know that they have the ability to give more than initially offered it would be twice as hard to get volunteers for the original amount