this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
39 points (100.0% liked)

memes

10405 readers
1969 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

Always remember what really happened with the McDonald's lady who sued because her "coffee was too hot".

McDonald's themselves started the campaign that the issue was laughable, and seeded the notion that it's ridiculous, how could she not know coffee hot?

What really happened was that the coffee was:

  • Served well above safe ranges to maximize profits, so the coffee could be served longer
  • Was served near boiling temperature
  • Was so hot that it FUSED HER LABIA requiring extensive surgery to repair.

She sued only for her hospital bills.

They started a smear campaign against her to convince the public that she was a moron and she just wanted a payday.

Don't trust corporations. Ever.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Not to mention they were warned many times before about serving coffee that's too hot. The woman got such a huge settlement because the judge was tired of McDonald's crap

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

Also they calculated the cost of lawsuits like that and decided they would make more money selling it that hot than they would lose in lawsuits over how hot the coffee was.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

What's that old quote? "A lie can make it around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes", or something like that? I believe that was pre-internet too.

It also happens with politics. I constantly see provocative headlines get lots of attention in one circle, and then the later corrections only get passed around in the opposite circle, if at all.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

I dont understand this, coffee is generally made with near boiling hot water. Many coffee machines make the coffee in front of your eyes. Of course its served boiling hot, no?

I mean her accident is extremely unfortunate, but her needing money for medical bills is a problem with society, not mcdonalds.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Coffee is brewed near boiling, but the hottest it should be served is 60 degrees C, or around 140 degrees F. Basically her temperature was the same as it was literally coming out of the machine, no one takes a big gulp of coffee the second it comes out of the machine.

McDonalds kept their coffee as hot as possible to give the illusion it was fresher than it was. By keeping the coffee at 190-200F then they believed that customers would feel that the coffee was fresher, even though they knew it was unsafe to serve coffee that hot.

Larger places follow the same rules here, while coffee is brewed extremely hot it usually rests for a bit before serving unless a customer explicitly asks for it. In restaurants it's served for you. Even Starbucks most of their drinks are milk based which cools the coffee, except for Americanos which are just espresso and hot water, and you'll usually see those with an insulator cup to highlight that

Found this, which explains serving coffee better than I can. https://mtpak.coffee/2022/08/takeaway-cups-coffee-temperature-ideal-serving/

https://www.caoc.org/?pg=facts

McDonald’s admitted it had known about the risk of serious burns from its scalding hot coffee for more than 10 years. The risk had repeatedly been brought to its attention through numerous other claims and suits.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Many places here you get your coffee straight from the machine that brews it (as in you press the button yourself), far too hot to drink immediately.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

You can legally kill anyone related to someone who has had Disney+.

Iirc, the wife died, the husband sued, and they tried to say the husband can't sue because HE had had the subscription a long time ago.

Each subscriber loses the right to sue for any of their loved ones.

After all, if they're dead, they can't sue you anyway

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

If it really boils down to this, how can one fight back? I don't wanna sit here and see these sad articles blow by, what can I do to tell Disney to fuck off. I did not sign up for this, I wanted to watch funny cartoons and superheroes like a normal person, and this is my reward? If suing them is futile, is storming their office and yelling at their corporate head about this any better? I'm pissed, and I can't sit here and wait for other legal heads to shut this stupid clause down.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

If it really boils down to this, how can one fight back?

Historically? Guillotines in the village square, and/or Molotovs through the front windows of the overlords’ house. The rich learned a long time ago that when no other recourse is left, people will eventually turn to violence. And they learned that keeping the poors placated is a matter of life or death. Because money and fame won’t stop an angry mob, and even trained soldiers will get overwhelmed by sheer crowd size.

I believe Sun Tsu wrote something applicable in The Art of War, along the lines of “Always leave a surrounded army a way out. Show them a way to life so they will not be compelled to fight to the death. Because even an exhausted army will fight to the death if they have no other option.” So the rich and powerful set up systems that are heavily skewed in the rich’s favor, but at least attempt to appear fair on the surface. They set up a visible “way to life” so that people could at least feel like they had a viable way of fighting back without resorting to violence.

But recently, the rich and powerful seem to have forgotten that, and have dropped all pretext of fairness. Now it’s just blatant “you’re going to be killed and there’s nothing you can do about it.” Which means that the people are eventually going to be forced to fight to the death, because they’re cornered and see no other option. And I genuinely believe that if things carry on this same trajectory that people will turn to violence as a means of recourse, because it’s quickly becoming the only effective recourse that is within reach.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

I love this comment and Sun Tzu reference, thank you so much for posting it!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Always remember it's morally ethical to yar har Disney content

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It is by far the best reason they could give anyone for being pro piracy. Forget the morality of it anymore, when the alternative is signing your life away it would be stupid to pay for it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

we have killed satire and threw a dance party on its corps. How is this whole situation not just a funny article by the Onion

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The restaurant was directly responsible for the woman's death. The husband went after Disney because it was in Disney Springs and the website said the restaurant worked with allergies. It's more the ghoulish lawyers

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

It doesn't change what Disney tried to do to get out of it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If I recall, Disney Springs is outside of the parks, basically an outside mall-type area with a bunch of third-party shops and restaurants. Disney is plenty evil, but they're just the landlord in this situation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

A landlord that owns a streaming service who tries to argue that usage of that streaming service allows them to not be sued by fucking up your food order.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Gotta be honest, I have been hearing about this but have no idea what the deal is. Can someone enlighten me?

Edit: Nm I should just actually read the comments.