you do for virtually every other industry that exists. Denny’s can’t sell my eggs to someone else under the assumption a certain percent of egg-eaters are no-shows.

Corporations don’t have the right to defraud you, even if agreed to in the T&C.

Why is this industry the exception? No other industry can sell the product they sold you to someone else and demand you accept that.

I didn’t realize the DOT was the body of government that interpretted existing fraud law, I thought that was courts.

What do I know? We have no rights, I guess, we bend over for the TSA and United Airlines all the same.

Do you have any rationale as to why this solitary industry isn’t held to the same standards of…

in what other industry can you sell a product and then sell that product to someone else too?

It’s a fucking scam. It should be suit-worthy. If this happened in a muhfuckin Denny’s there would be universal outrage.

“Sorry, we know you bought these eggs but we sold them to someone else anticipating you would not eat…

Imagine you buy a concert ticket, go to the concert, have specific seats booked, plan time off from work, book a hotel, drive three hours - then you get told “oh, we expect a certain percent of concert-goers to not show up. We actually sold your seat to an employee who weally weally wanted it. Fuck off now, but you…

That’s not a reasonable excuse for having sold a product that does not exist.

This is a scam

I think selling more tickets than you have seats is fraud. You have sold a product that does not exist. This is a textbook scam that many companies have been sued for.

consumers have the right to purchase a reservation and demand to keep it.

Fuck your employees. Rent them a car for their five-hour drive

Someone sure feels a lot of outrage. Does it make you feel good, snowflake?

Letting people know how their actions will be taken is common courtesy. Only an asshole doesn’t care how they come off when speaking to people.

Since when did it inspire wrath and fury to note “hey, someone might take that the wrong way”?

Get…

Couldn’t the same be said for being called out? If you’re called on and clearly didn’t mean something derogatorily, shut the fuck up about it.

Instead we get a “participation trophies” speech. Ironic.

“Darn kids these days are so offended, it offends me! Someone notice my outrage! This isn’t ironic at all!”

Really?

It would be handled like virtually every aspect of policing and government work. You perform to the standards set by the law and the policies of the body you work for.

There are rules of engagement for tasers, pepper spray, and firearms - when they are appropriate and inappropriate - and there should be similar…

Fuck nuance.

in dog person that translates to “everywhere”

she said she “felt vindicated”

She didn’t say “I like shitty movies therefore I’m Einstein”

FOH with that quick-to-rage bullshit

The first like you provided was a single case - that’s known as an anecdote. I addressed that and don’t accept it as data analytics.

You really don’t think it’s shameful to deny a person for taking a prescribed medication that hasn’t been proven - with data, not one single patient - to cause any negative…

Just to reiterate, TLDR; people are dying because they’re being denied treatment for taking a prescribed medication that hasn’t been shown - with data - to have negative interactions with rejection drugs or increase chance of rejection itself.

That’s not how medical professionals are supposed to behave

I’m saying you should demonstrate a medical need or expect scrutiny. And they should get scrutiny. Because they haven’t demonstrated a medical need. If you doctor asks you to spin 6 times, it’s fair to ask why that’s medically necessary and demand an answer as to why you’re being denied life-saving treatment. It’s…

“It’s well documented that patients who can follow medical recommendations perfectly are at an increased likelihood for prolonged organ survival”, therefore, if your doctor asks you to spin around six times, recite the Lord’s Prayer, and drink snake oil thrice daily, it’s purely medical necessity.

This is just a string of fallacies.

This is not a reason to deny patients who have cannabis in their systems. There is no documented correlation between cannabis in a patient’s system and increased organ transplant rejections.

It’s just a blind appeal to authority. Medical professionals should be held to a higher…

Blind appeal to “the rules” is a great rationale for denying a patient a life-saving transplant out of no ethical or medical necessity