By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
burninmylight on 20 September 2013
Edit Thread
Max King of the Wild said:
burninmylight said:
 

He showed the employees his business card because he didn't have a photo ID. That doesn't excuse the fact that he was being a jerk; he should have had photo ID in the first place.

He didn't use the business card for any of the reasons you listed above. I now believe the issue with you is not that you truly don't get the problem with the Gamestop manager, but that you simply can't admit when you're wrong, so you divert from the issue at hand and resort to ad hominem attacks, like you did with Hibern81. In other words, I don't think you're dumb. I just see that you are incredibly stubborn. I used to be like you. Then I realized that the day I start focusing on getting it right instead of thinking I'm always right is the day I become a better, wiser person. Hopefully you'll see this for yourself someday soon.

If i really wanted to dismiss you I would have told you to read a dictionary when you said contradiction. But I least felt like I could get through to you. Its obvious though that I cant. The point is he gave out his business card. A business cards purpose is to network and get your name, business and contact information out there. You cant reasonable expect that if you give it to someone that they wont give it to someone else because thats its purpose. The moral of the story? dont try to use a business card as proof of ID. Why would he have his card but not ID. My guess is he was just being extremely difficult. There is no deflecting on my end since this is the point ive been making since the begining. You want to talk about being stubborn how about you cant admit you were wrong when you said it was wrong for her to not give her last name?

You want me to whip out the dictionary again? Fine. You showed me the literal purpose of a business card, let me show you the literal purpose of a driver's license.

driver's license

noun
a permit, as one issued by a state's motor vehicle bureau, that allows the holder to drive a motor vehicle on public roads.
or from Wikipedia:

A driver's license/licence or driving licence is an official document which states that a person may operate a vehicle, such as a motorcycle, car, truck, or a bus, on a public roadway.
So by your logic (means of identification can only be used for their original purpose), even if the guy brought a driver's license, they shouldn't have taken it as ID because that's not the purpose of a driver's license. So unless he brought strictly a state ID or some other means meant only for the purpose of identification, they still would have had the same issue. But since they went ahead and gave him his game in spite of his improper means of identification, it should have ended then. But no, she escalated the matter by taking his personal info and threatening to make it public to chide him in front of a crowd. That is a big no-no in the working world. This is what you fail to understand.

con·tra·dic·tion

  [kon-truh-dik-shuh  n] Show IPA
noun
1.
the act of contradicting; gainsaying or opposition.
2.
assertion of the contrary or opposite; denial.
3.
a statement or proposition that contradicts or denies another or itself and is logically incongruous.
4.
direct opposition between things compared; inconsistency.
5.
a contradictory act, fact, etc.
So now that we have established the definition of "contradiction," let me again point out yours.
Hibern81 said:
"Would you want a lunatic with your first and last name? I wouldn't. Her unwillingness to comply? LOL he doesn't even need her name. Come on... you cant be serious"

But it's ok for her to give out his info? Sounds a bit hypocritical to me.
You're basically saying it's OK for her to divulge his personal information as a customer, but she doesn't owe him at least a full name, even though she's a manager of the store. It doesn't matter if it was on a business card, a driver's license or a paper napkin. He didn't give it to her so she could tell the rest of the public.
We have no idea if she's required to give her name or not. Only way for us to know is to ask a Gamespot employee. Therefore, I'd like to know how you arrived at the conclusion that you were right about that. Like I said, you're more concerned about trying to make yourself appear to be right than to actually get it right. And even if it's not actually company policy that she must give her full name to an inquiring customer, it was still highly unprofessional on her part not to do so, and it only served to further escalate the situation, making herself and Gamespot look bad in the process.

Max King of the Wild said:

Ulgh, go read a dictionary please.

See, this is where you start getting away from the subject at hand and start resorting to cheap personal attacks. You decided to take it there, so it's fine by me. All it tells me is that you had nothing better to come up with, so you took the easy way out.

I never missed your point: you've been saying from the get-go that a business card is not a substitute for photo ID. Yeah, I get that, and I even said as much:

burninmylight said:
NobleTeam360 said:
From past retail experience I've had if you can tell the guy is over 17 or 18 then you don't need to ask for an ID. So the manager was just trying to be a bitch just like most Gamestop mangers do.


If the guy was picking up a preorder, then he needed to bring photo ID no matter what. That's store policy. She was being a bitch because she escalated the scene by dissing him on his way out, threatening to give out his personal info to other customers, pandering to the camera and high-fiving the guy recording it, and refusing to give her full name when the problem customer demanded it. None of that was acceptable, and she deserved to lose her job.
You appear to miss my point, time and time again: despite the customer's idiocy, she got what she deserved because of her lack of professionalism. In no way was she justified by threatening to give out any info on that business card to the other customers, nor were her choice of words acceptable, nor her pandering to the camera and other customers. It was only made worse when she refused to state her name, company policy or not, because it only made her look more childish.
Unfortunately, we can't confirm whether she was fired. But let's assume she was: tell me what part of that episode led to her dismissal.