Comedic "things you would ban": minor things that irritate you

[Gloster]

One that is probably going to upset a few people:

If you are disabled, elderly or unwieldy you have every right to expect that other people will do their best not to hinder your passage. However, it is reasonable to expect that you will not casually and inconsiderately hinder them:

- Do not walk two abreast on a narrow pavement, so forcing everyone else into a busy road.
- Do not get up so that you are waiting to be the first off the bus when it arrives at the bus station, but then negotiate the step down at the speed of a comatose sloth, before blocking everyone else’s descent by immediately stopping while you rummage in your bag, make a ‘phone call or light up a cigarette.
- Do not decide that the best place to wait for someone is blocking one side of a shop doorway so that it can’t be opened and with your bags taking up most of the remaining width of the entrance.

This has been rumbling around in my head for a few weeks, but today I was stuck behind a couple (probably only in their forties) who completely blocked the pavement as they moved at the speed of a lethargic glacier. I am on a stick, but I walk uphill faster than they walked down one.

 

[dangie]

I don't know if this was done by the local council or the local bus company, but the litter bins have been removed from bus stops. I'm guessing (probably not wrong) the reason is that they don't have to send someone to empty them.

Having said this, they rarely emptied them anyway. Full bins overflowing onto the pavement.

 

[AM9]

One that is probably going to upset a few people:

If you are disabled, elderly or unwieldy you have every right to expect that other people will do their best not to hinder your passage. However, it is reasonable to expect that you will not casually and inconsiderately hinder them:

- Do not walk two abreast on a narrow pavement, so forcing everyone else into a busy road.

I might add to that (but not necessarily in the contect of disabled/elderly), people who always walk on the side of the pavepment furthest away from the kerb. That is irrespective of the direction of adjacent road traffic. If the pavement is less than (say) 3 persons' width, that forces others to walk near/on the kerb with traffic approaching from behind. The highway code expressly urges pedestrians to walk on the right side of roads without footpaths so that they are facing oncoming traffic. Thus it is reasonable for pedestrians to walk on the left of footpaths at all possible times except when on the offside of one way streets.*
Sometimes I get really fed up with oncoming pedestrians clinging to the hedge/fence expecting me to step close to the traffic approaching from the rear, for their 'convenience'. So eventually when I see another imminent clash, I keep to the correct side and get my mobile phone out and stand still looking at it. So far this has always helped them to get into their correct position to pass, (with a scowling look of course). I respond with a smile so that they know why I stopped. I might add, I wouldn't do that if it is reasonable for them to keep safe, such as a small child or a person with walking difficulties.
For many years I have habitually walked on the left on normal pavements and regarded the behaviour of others as just inconsiderate. However, on holiday in New York in 2008, I realised that almost everybody walked on the right and looked bothered because I walked on the left, then it dawned on me that it was a generally accepted practice there - the reason for the difference was indeed that in the US vehicles are driven on the right of the road.

 

[Calthrop]

My recollection from studying the Romans in Britain (not that play!) was that the method was that the soldiers drew lots, so those condemned to die were neither chosen by the officers or picked on. I have a vague feeling that officers could be included in those who were liable to face decimation if thought appropriate. The Gods will decide!

Thanks -- interesting. In circumstances of "blanket" punishment irrespective of individual conduct -- something considered "not on" nowadays, certainly not when adults are on the receiving end -- I suppose that that's the fairest way of doing it.

Yes, I'm sure you're right, but I shall continue to use postal services so long as I am able. In a way see the strategy as analogous to railway booking offices, where every effort has been made to dissuade or actively prevent their use by random closures or hours cut, reductions in staffing levels resulting in people forced to use machines or jump on trains without tickets,etc etc.

Re "snail-mail": I, too, don't propose docile-ly to give in -- plan, like yourself, to continue to do the thing as long as it's possible for me to do. I just see, in the end: the inevitable, catching up with the likes of us in this matter.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Not a matter of arithmetic (exponential and decimate) but a word used without reference to its meaning is 'incredible'. It means, pretty transparently, the opposite of credible, but it's sloppily used to mean 'very wonderful'.
A politician (no names) was interviewed on a radio news programme some time ago and asked about the party's plans for a large increase in public spending and she replied. gushlingly, "Yes, these plans are incredible!'. Perhaps an unusual example of a politician n=being truthful in an interview

I fear you may be fighting a losing battle on this one... was it not the case a few years ago that the Oxford English Dictionary (iirc) added the figurative/hyperbolic use of the word "literally"? Thus we have the bizarre situation where "literally" literally means the opposite of what "literally" literally means!

Then again I'm a child of the (19)80s and 90s, and back when I was at the cutting-edge of pop culture (if I ever was) things that were really good were "wicked"... then a decade-and-half or so later "sick" became a positive adjective!

 

[AM9]

Then again I'm a child of the (19)80s and 90s, and back when I was at the cutting-edge of pop culture (if I ever was) things that were really good were "wicked"... then a decade-and-half or so later "sick" became a positive adjective!

But that is just kids talk and by definition, is used to be different so like any other social fad is destined to be regarded as 'uncool' by the next lot. I was posting about the misuse of normal funtional words triggered by lazy and lowbrow news media.

 

[43096]

I fear you may be fighting a losing battle on this one... was it not the case a few years ago that the Oxford English Dictionary (iirc) added the figurative/hyperbolic use of the word "literally"? Thus we have the bizarre situation where "literally" literally means the opposite of what "literally" literally means!

Then again I'm a child of the (19)80s and 90s, and back when I was at the cutting-edge of pop culture (if I ever was) things that were really good were "wicked"... then a decade-and-half or so later "sick" became a positive adjective!

On topic for this forum, “dreadful” is basher-speak for something really rather good.

 

[Strat-tastic]

I might add to that (but not necessarily in the contect of disabled/elderly), people who always walk on the side of the pavepment furthest away from the kerb. That is irrespective of the direction of adjacent road traffic. If the pavement is less than (say) 3 persons' width, that forces others to walk near/on the kerb with traffic approaching from behind. The highway code expressly urges pedestrians to walk on the right side of roads without footpaths so that they are facing oncoming traffic. Thus it is reasonable for pedestrians to walk on the left of footpaths at all possible times except when on the offside of one way streets.*
Sometimes I get really fed up with oncoming pedestrians clinging to the hedge/fence expecting me to step close to the traffic approaching from the rear, for their 'convenience'. So eventually when I see another imminent clash, I keep to the correct side and get my mobile phone out and stand still looking at it. So far this has always helped them to get into their correct position to pass, (with a scowling look of course). I respond with a smile so that they know why I stopped. I might add, I wouldn't do that if it is reasonable for them to keep safe, such as a small child or a person with walking difficulties.
For many years I have habitually walked on the left on normal pavements and regarded the behaviour of others as just inconsiderate. However, on holiday in New York in 2008, I realised that almost everybody walked on the right and looked bothered because I walked on the left, then it dawned on me that it was a generally accepted practice there - the reason for the difference was indeed that in the US vehicles are driven on the right of the road.

Although you have a point of logic here, the Highway Code is irrelevant. Besides, some folk feel more secure on the 'outside lane', whatever the rights and wrongs of that. Mental health.

 

[Purple Train]

Then again I'm a child of the (19)80s and 90s, and back when I was at the cutting-edge of pop culture (if I ever was) things that were really good were "wicked"... then a decade-and-half or so later "sick" became a positive adjective!

I remember when "sick" was all the rage at school. I found it desperately confusing, going from reading a 1990s book series where "sick" was negative to hearing it applied to all kinds of positive things. I hated it (to be honest, I hate most of pop culture, but explaining that one in this thread will require two essays). One might say I was sick of it

 

[Richard Scott]

I remember when "sick" was all the rage at school. I found it desperately confusing, going from reading a 1990s book series where "sick" was negative to hearing it applied to all kinds of positive things. I hated it (to be honest, I hate most of pop culture, but explaining that one in this thread will require two essays). One might say I was sick of it

It was in use until fairly recently, certainly heard it used mid 2010s relating to something good.

 

[AM9]

Although you have a point of logic here, the Highway Code is irrelevant. Besides, some folk feel more secure on the 'outside lane', whatever the rights and wrongs of that. Mental health.

If by outside lane you mean the lane furthest away from the oncoming traffic, that has nothing to do with mental health. Walking next to the kerb on a relatively narrow pavement is less safe than tucked in close to hedges/fences etc. so if people think that they are always entitled to their pet 'safest' part of the pavement at the expense of others' safety, that is just plain selfishness, not some entitlement that everybody else should 'respect'.

 

[Purple Train]

It was in use until fairly recently, certainly heard it used mid 2010s relating to something good.

I haven't heard it in that context for years. I wonder what has taken on the mantle post-2017-or-thereabouts?

 

[Strat-tastic]

If by outside lane you mean the lane furthest away from the oncoming traffic, that has nothing to do with mental health. Walking next to the kerb on a relatively narrow pavement is less safe than tucked in close to hedges/fences etc. so if people think that they are always entitled to their pet 'safest' part of the pavement at the expense of others' safety, that is just plain selfishness, not some entitlement that everybody else should 'respect'.

I would argue that it is to do with mental health, having experienced it in myself and others.

 

[bspahh]

If by outside lane you mean the lane furthest away from the oncoming traffic, that has nothing to do with mental health. Walking next to the kerb on a relatively narrow pavement is less safe than tucked in close to hedges/fences etc. so if people think that they are always entitled to their pet 'safest' part of the pavement at the expense of others' safety, that is just plain selfishness, not some entitlement that everybody else should 'respect'.

A dog is likely to stop, sniff and urinate on a hedge. If you walk with the dog next to the hedge, they are less likely to block the path. On its own, it doesn't seem selfish to me.

If its a busy path, and people have formed into lanes, then its more considerate to follow. It doesn't seem to me something where strict lane discipline is useful or appropriate.

 

[WelshBluebird]

- Do not get up so that you are waiting to be the first off the bus when it arrives at the bus station, but then negotiate the step down at the speed of a comatose sloth

To counter that slightly, I have seen buses (and trains) close their doors and leave whilst someone with slower mobility has still been making their way to the doors. By waiting for other people to get off first that increases the risk of that happening so I fully understand why someone who may take longer to get to the doors may want to be one of the first to the doors.

 

[dangie]

Shops, especially Charity Shops, who prop their door open with the heating on full blast. All that money floating out of the window.

 

[Busaholic]

Shops, especially Charity Shops, who prop their door open with the heating on full blast. All that money floating out of the window.

I believe that is illegal in at least one European country.

 

[PeterY]

Shops, especially Charity Shops, who prop their door open with the heating on full blast. All that money floating out of the window.

I volunteer in a charity shop and unless it's bitterly cold the doors are open and yes it's freezing.

 

[dangie]

I volunteer in a charity shop and unless it's bitterly cold the doors are open and yes it's freezing.

My town, as many are, is awash with charity shops. One in particular, let call it the British Heart Foundation, always have their door wide open with the heating on. Whenever I go in I make a point of shutting the door behind me as I leave. I then stand outside and see how long it takes before someone comes and reopens it. It never takes long.

 

[Busaholic]

My town, as many are, is awash with charity shops. One in particular, let call it the British Heart Foundation, always have their door wide open with the heating on. Whenever I go in I make a point of shutting the door behind me as I leave. I then stand outside and see how long it takes before someone comes and reopens it. It never takes long.

They are probably ordered to do this, as there are some involved in retail who have the mistaken (imo) view that a closed door at a shop discourages potential customers, or even leads to them thinking it is closed despite evidence to the contrary!

 

[Richard Scott]

My town, as many are, is awash with charity shops. One in particular, let call it the British Heart Foundation, always have their door wide open with the heating on. Whenever I go in I make a point of shutting the door behind me as I leave. I then stand outside and see how long it takes before someone comes and reopens it. It never takes long.

Have charity shops always left doors open or is it left over from virus flapping?

 

[Busaholic]

Have charity shops always left doors open or is it left over from virus flapping?

It varies from shop to shop, or charity to charity. My Oxfam has a closed door policy outside the summer.

 

[Gloster]

I would think that the type of door has changed over the years. Charity shops used to mainly appear in the older, less attractive and more difficult to rent out shops with lighter doors. Nowadays even the modernised shops are becoming difficult to rent out and the doors have automatic door closers. Perhaps somebody has decided that the extra push to overcome the door closer is enough to dissuade some potential shoppers.

 

[DelW]

They are probably ordered to do this, as there are some involved in retail who have the mistaken (imo) view that a closed door at a shop discourages potential customers, or even leads to them thinking it is closed despite evidence to the contrary!

Quite a few of the shops in my High Street, both charity and otherwise, have signs in the door along the lines of "Come in, we're open, but the door is closed to keep the heat in".

It does of course require people to read the sign. Yesterday I watched someone walk straight into the locked door of a shop, despite the very prominent "Closed" sign it was displaying. They obviously expected it to open with a push, and they hit it with quite a thump when it didn't.

 

[dangie]

I volunteer in a charity shop and unless it's bitterly cold the doors are open and yes it's freezing.

I actually go into some charity shops with the sole intention of closing the door behind me both going in and coming out. When you’re retired you need a hobby

Note: I do occasionally buy books.

*******************

BBC weather forecast for my area from 6pm to 5am says ‘Sunny Intervals and a gentle breeze’

Not sure how it can be sunny, sunset was at 4.30pm

Note: 2 posts have got auto merged

 

[Drogba11CFC]

"Phantom bookers" who swoop in and nab the last hotel room that you're about to book.

 

[nw1]

I realise it's maybe a bit un-PC to criticise it at all, but... badly-implemented multi-factor authentication.

Particularly variants which require you to have a phone, and if your phone breaks or goes missing, you're shut out of the system...

 

[Busaholic]

I realise it's maybe a bit un-PC to criticise it at all, but... badly-implemented multi-factor authentication.

Particularly variants which require you to have a phone, and if your phone breaks or goes missing, you're shut out of the system...

Authentication in general, which is rapidly becoming a nightmare out of all proportion to what ordinary human beings need and want, and won't keep the 'bad guys' out of our 'data' anyway.

Cat among pigeons time.

 

[birchesgreen]

Random two-factor authentication, which always seems to wait until my phone is nowhere near me before going into action.

 

[Drogba11CFC]

Admin fees for print-at-home tickets.