Join 3,420 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)

Right of reply
March 12, 2009 11:46 PM   Subscribe

This question irks me:
The business in question really has no right of reply. I don't see why the question couldn't be worded in such a way as to not to mention the dealership's name. For all we know the OP may be a direct competitor (I know, you most probably aren't), and now when someone Googles the dealership it will for ever have this rather unpleasant result- and recommendations to other similar business. I suppose Comcast, eBay, Sony etc come in for a hiding every so often- but they are in a different league. What's the MeFi policy on this sort of thing?
posted by mattoxic to Etiquette/Policy at 11:46 PM (74 comments total) 1 user marked this as a favorite

We often remove these mentions if they're not pertinent to the question. I looked at this and it's pretty central to the question though there's no reason to link to them so I removed that. Once in a while we get contacted by company people that weren't mentioned in a positive light on MeFi, demanding removal and/or rebuttal, but I can count those on one hand.

As always, instead of blanket policy we're usually case-by-case and in this case, we have a longtime user with loads of history on the site that doesn't seem to work at a competitor asking a specific question asking for alternatives that kind of requires mentioning what alternative should be avoided (the original culprit in this case).
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:59 PM on March 12, 2009


What's the MeFi policy on this sort of thing?

I always thought it was a Scene 5 sort of situation.
posted by carsonb at 12:19 AM on March 13, 2009


While I don't have a big problem with the question as asked (although Irontom explaining why he's been underwhelmed with his interactions with the dealership might guide the answers better), I probably would have just asked "Can anyone recommend a Honda dealership in northern VA?" If a bunch of people recommended the one I didn't like, I might realize it was me and not the dealership. But if it is truly a poor dealership, everyone will recommend other dealerships anyway. And it also removes the possibility of the dealer finding the question and getting upset at MeFi.

But then I'm baffled how anyone could interact with a car dealership and not be underwhelmed.
posted by blm at 12:31 AM on March 13, 2009 [3 favorites]


Yeah, what the hell is a good experience at a car dealership?
posted by koeselitz at 1:03 AM on March 13, 2009 [6 favorites]


I think it had pretty good essence, but the savor was lacking.
posted by fleacircus at 1:06 AM on March 13, 2009 [2 favorites]


But then I'm baffled how anyone could interact with a car dealership and not be underwhelmed.

Yes, our last service bill was $1500 for an oil change and a "fault in the srs system that couldn't be traced"

Perhaps "a dealership" could be used in place of the name of the entity.
posted by mattoxic at 1:15 AM on March 13, 2009


I think we could all use a good irking.
posted by chillmost at 1:57 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Yeah, what the hell is a good experience at a car dealership?

Making the sale without screwing me? Doing the work on my car as promised for a reasonable price? When the ignition fails and my wife is stuck with a car 30 km from the dealer and a kid at home, sending a man in a van with parts and fixing the problem with no added charge for the travel time/call out?
posted by rodgerd at 2:29 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


I think we could all use a good irking.

Yes, the system does show that you're due for a 60,000 comment full-system irking. We can squeeze you in Tuesday morning at 1030am; it'll take about two hours. It'll be $228.24, but is necessary for your warranty, you know.
posted by Netzapper at 3:18 AM on March 13, 2009 [3 favorites]


We draw the line at linking to stuff if we think the poster is trying to make some sort of point. No links unless absolutely necessary but mentioning the name of a dealer you've had a bad experience with in the course of a question about trying to find a new dealer seems pretty okay to me. The poster has been here a long time so this is clearly not a flyby attempt to tarnish the name of the dealer in my opinion. If it looks sketch we'll definitely look further into it.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 3:20 AM on March 13, 2009


The business in question really has no right of reply.

Actually, they did have chance when there was a link to their business, it's conceivable they would have seen a traffic spike and traced it back its source. But that's gone now, so nevermind.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:36 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Hmm, that came off snarkier than intended. My point was that if you're worried about the business not being able to reply to vague criticisms, that seems odd when a link was provided to the business.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 3:39 AM on March 13, 2009


1) It's vital to the question in that it eliminates one suggestion.

2) Since when is there an injunction (on MeFi or in life) against speaking ill of businesses?

3) Any suggestions are going to be implicitly positive statements about other businesses (and in all likelihood explicitly positive). As long as everything said is true, why only allow positive reviews?
posted by DU at 4:57 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


How do we know that mattoxic doesnt work for Koon's Honda?
posted by criticalbill at 5:15 AM on March 13, 2009 [4 favorites]


Is it vital to the question? I would hoped the OP would have the processing power to exclude any answer that mentions the dealership in question.

And the OPs gripe with the particular dealership in isn't really relevant at all.

We bought our CR-V from a Honda dealership several years ago, and have been repeatedly underwhelmed by our interactions with them.

This conveys the same message- but replacing the dealers name with "a Honda dealership" gives it a much less personal gripey tone,

I'm not against speaking ill of a business, Big Macs are unhealthy, UPS were unhelpful and the PS3 is over priced MEHware etc, I agree- but in these cases there are untold words written about the merits or no of their particular unhealthy crap expensive service, a particular local car dealership is a different case entirely.
posted by mattoxic at 5:24 AM on March 13, 2009


How do we know that mattoxic doesnt work for Koon's Honda?

I control it from my base here in Melbourne, I do Honda, the missus does Nissan and Renault.
posted by mattoxic at 5:26 AM on March 13, 2009 [2 favorites]


Calling a dealership "underwhelming" is really not that terrible on the scale of negative things to say about a business you've had bad interactions with. We look at these things on a case by case basis and generally speaking if we think someone is posting a question just to slag a company on a site with high page rank, we'll axe it. In this case the link wasn't essential to the question so we removed it, but saying that you don't like a certain dealership when you're looking for suggestions for a new one seems totally okay to me. If the OP has already gone to one dealership in a geographical region I think it's okay to mention that.

The "right of reply" idea isn't really a big one in the US. If someone from that dealership wants to get a MeFi membership and contact IronTom directly via the site, they are more than welcome to.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:34 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


It's no different than someone saying: "I don't like Coke, can you recommend a different cola product?"
posted by blue_beetle at 5:44 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Oh and 4) Corporations (and their apologists) respond to any conscientiousness with "we exist to make money". In other words, they don't do etiquette, except to make or avoid losing money, they don't do social awareness, unless that will make or avoid losing money, etc. Therefore if you are unhappy with a business, it doesn't seem out of bounds by their own rules to attempt to reduce the amount of money they make proportionate to the unhappiness you feel. (In fact, I would argue that "proportionate" is even playing nice. Corporations don't try to make proportionate money--they try to maximize it.)
posted by DU at 5:44 AM on March 13, 2009 [3 favorites]


I control it from my base here in Melbourne, I do Honda, the missus does Nissan and Renault.

And who does the missus?
posted by gman at 5:50 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Why waste the time of people who might otherwise recommend the very dealership they're trying to get away from? Just so a dealership can avoid being called 'underwhelming'? Really?

It's not like the guy went on a crazy ranting tear, he was so understated that his criticism almost seems like non-criticism. Does any expect to be whelmed by their car dealership? Oil changes and routine maintenance are not the stuff of dreams. I'm sure his problems are more specific than just a general sense of ennui about his dealership, but he's chosen not to make a big deal of them.
posted by jacquilynne at 6:33 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


If they have an advertising budget, they already have right of reply.

If they don't, then I have a simple proposition: wire me one million dollars, and I will guarantee at least two posts in various places on the internet, parroting the company line verbatim. Both posts will be made within six hours of the cash being withdrawn by me.

...but setting my cash grab aside, do you give companies right of reply in your casual conversations among friends? Does anyone do that? No? Why not? And why is this situation any different?
posted by aramaic at 6:40 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Metatalk: My problems are more specific than just a general sense of ennui
posted by lukemeister at 7:02 AM on March 13, 2009


"The business in question really has no right of reply."

It's an auto dealership. It exists to mercilessly rip you off at worst and underwhelm you at best, and serves no other purpose. What, exactly, would the value of some hypothetical reply be? Why should the named business be entitled to the "right" to advertise here? They can say what they like on their billboard, TV ad, flyer, poster, web page, blocky window-painting, eyeball-searing jumbo screen sign next to the freeway, AdWords buy, intrusive radio spot, and on the arrow-shaped sign that the scruffy guy is holding out by the main road.

There is absolutely no shortage of venues for businesses to make their voices heard. The absolute last thing the world needs is another one.

"The "right of reply" idea isn't really a big one in the US."

Holy crap! I had no idea "right of reply" was some kind of code phrase. Talk about a fucking massive culture gap. I'm staring in the face of a concept of epic alien absurdity. There really are people who think that just because I use my dime to talk about an entity, said entity should be entitled to use my dime to spout its views? And that this should be enshrined in law? Seriously?

Perhaps I'm just an ignorant provincial American but "...isn't really a big one in the US" understates things just a touch, I think.
posted by majick at 7:06 AM on March 13, 2009 [3 favorites]


I agree with majick.

The right of reply is the right to defend oneself against criticism. In Europe there have been proposals to enshrine the principle in law that there is a legally enforceable right of reply that applies to all media, including newspapers, magazines, and other print media, along with radio, television, and the internet.


That's crazy talk.
posted by languagehat at 7:10 AM on March 13, 2009


I don't think it's crazy that there be a right of reply, although with freedom of speech I also don't see what's preventing them. But I also agree that businesses already spend billions on advertising, so if anything a complaint IS the reply.
posted by DU at 7:15 AM on March 13, 2009


All this over "underwhelmed"? I think this is actually a gift to the business. If it got anywhere high in google searches, they have a complete year to come on here and reply, and instantly get a bunch of new fans, and maybe even win back their customer. I say put the link back if there was one.
posted by cashman at 7:25 AM on March 13, 2009


And the OPs gripe with the particular dealership in isn't really relevant at all.

Except that if the OP hadn't mentioned it by name in the question, someone would have said, "hey have you tried Koon's Honda?" and then the OP would have to say, "actually that's who we found underwhelming" so the way the question was presented is simply the most efficient way.

If Koon's Honda notices that this is suddenly the top search result for their name, they are free to join and chime in on the thread.
posted by mikepop at 7:26 AM on March 13, 2009


Man on Internet "Underwhelmed by Koon's Honda"
Japanese Automaker Files for Bankruptcy
posted by lukemeister at 7:27 AM on March 13, 2009 [5 favorites]


"The "right of reply" idea isn't really a big one in the US."

It used to be, in a manner of speaking, until Raygun dismantled it.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 7:36 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Local Raccoons "Not Exactly Impressed" With Human Dealership Either
posted by cortex (staff) at 7:39 AM on March 13, 2009 [3 favorites]


Shout out to my overwhelming guys in Garner: Hey Johnson & Johnson, you guys are faboo!!! As foreign car specialists, you rock! We love the Volkswagon Passat you sold us, and every single time we bring the car or truck in, you guys are fast, reliable, and dirt cheap. Yeah!!!

Thumbs down to my underwhelming guys in Garner: Hey Hudson, you suck!! As lawnmower repair and service you could not be any worse. Every single time we bring the lawn mower in for repair, you keep it for 3 weeks, we pick it up when you call, and then we have to return the next day because you didn't actually fix the problem. Plus, $97.50? Really? That's nearly a third of the price of the mower. Boo Hiss.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:47 AM on March 13, 2009


This cinnamon roll is underwhelming.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:55 AM on March 13, 2009


Is this somethin....fuck it: I DON'T OWN A CAR MOTHERFUCKERS!!! HAhahahAHAHAHA
posted by mullacc at 7:57 AM on March 13, 2009 [2 favorites]


I was underwhelmed with the complaint aspect of this MeTa.
posted by jerseygirl at 8:14 AM on March 13, 2009


I find this thread to be

PRECISELY WHELMING!!!
posted by Mister_A at 8:22 AM on March 13, 2009 [4 favorites]


The poster is identifying which dealership they're switching from which is completely pertinent to asking which other dealership they should deal with. If people answered "Koon's Honda", their question doesn't really get answered, does it?
posted by David Fleming at 8:22 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Wow -- surprising coincidence, that. First thing I thought of when I saw it was a Honda dealership thread on another site that convinced me to go elsewhere, thankfully. Not one report, mind, but loads of them, consistent except for one rather defensive poster... whose IP tracked to the dealership (d'oh!).

Single reviews from semi-anonymous internet personalities do not wreck businesses. You know for every 20 reviews, you have at least a couple of crackpots. You look for consistent content and lucid observation. And if their competitors (we have 5 Honda dealers in our *immediate* area) rate consistently better, go with one of the others.

I guess my reply to

and now when someone Googles the dealership it will for ever have this rather unpleasant result-

is: so?
posted by Durn Bronzefist at 8:39 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


We see umpteen askmes along the lines of "I hate Verizon and need a new phone - who should I switch to?" and "I need a new mp3 player and Apple sucks so please recommend a non-Apple product" and I don't see how this one is different. In fact, I think it's even more important that he name the business in this case since it's a very local question - what if there are only three dealerships in the area? Doesn't it make sense for the poster to say which one he's tried and found lacking, rather than do the other thing that everyone seems to hate, which is waste people's time by not including pertinent information?
posted by rtha at 8:44 AM on March 13, 2009


It irks; it's a squeaky wheel. That's not going to be cheap to fix.
posted by Elmore at 8:48 AM on March 13, 2009


I flagged the first comment on that post as noise (since deleted) because it was basically the same as this callout: "Is this fair to Koon's Honda dealership?" It is absolutely absurd to me to think that you would want to silence a person's opinion of a business. There were no disparaging remarks, just a statement of displeasure with the experience. I can't imagine a more friendly way to put it.

Putting the value of a car dealership's reputation over that of the customer's opinion is exactly the wrong idea: the car dealership's reputation is directly a result of the customer's opinion. The internet provides an open forum for people to now put out their own personal experiences for other potential customers. That is a remarkably powerful tool, and of course one opinion is just that - one person.
posted by shinynewnick at 9:29 AM on March 13, 2009 [5 favorites]


It's no different from asking what brand SUV is better.


The only thing that irks me is the typo: "please hope us"
posted by Zambrano at 10:26 AM on March 13, 2009


"The only thing that irks me is the typo in-joke: 'please hope us'"
posted by mr_crash_davis mark II: Jazz Odyssey at 10:28 AM on March 13, 2009 [2 favorites]


I was underwhelmed by Koon's Honda too. I mean, I get that it's a commentary on contemporary car buying culture and the fetishization of commodity, but seriously, it's just a big stainless-steel car.
posted by klangklangston at 10:29 AM on March 13, 2009 [12 favorites]


If this was anything at all to worry about, Yelp, CitySearch, and hundreds of other community-input sites would be in some deep doo-doo.

Word-of-mouth is about the only defense (and unbiased resource) consumers have to make good decisions about where and how to spend their money. Being able to say "this didn't work for me; any other suggestions?" is not only legitimate, it's a huge part of consumer culture here.

Businesses are way more powerful than people and are allowed to get away with more than you can imagine - and this is true all over the world. In that light, I'm not sure why you're wanting to protect a business which hasn't met the needs of its consumers.

As others have said, there's nothing stopping the business owner from replying if they find this mention, but I'm thinking they'd be nonfussed about "underwhelming" with no damning details.
posted by batmonkey at 10:30 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Stop! Stop what you're doing!

Hark, do you hear? Yes, that — a grumbling in the distance! A heretic, an unbeliever has dared to murmur a less than exalted opinion of the results received from their latest offering to the idol! When strange travelers to this land ask the Great Oracle Goo Gle, whence my cart? — only nonsense and lies will the Oracle speak until this sin is swept clean!

We must silence this person, or the idol shall take great offense at their temerity, and the magic Corporate Esteem by which all gifts are distributed will wither, and our precious steams will dry up! Our women will be made barren and our cattle will give only blood! All great things are to the Koon's Honda Dealership given, and all great things received!

Find him! Sew up his lips! Clear the cache! Burn his hateful scrawlings and filthy marks, 'til all is left is ash and smoke! GO FORTH, YE MEFITES, AND EXPUNGE!
posted by adipocere at 10:44 AM on March 13, 2009 [2 favorites]


Oh Europe, I love you for your quaintiness.
posted by blue_beetle at 10:45 AM on March 13, 2009


I was underwhelmed by Koon's Honda too. I mean, I get that it's a commentary on contemporary car buying culture and the fetishization of commodity, but seriously, it's just a big stainless-steel car.

*kisses klang*

posted by scody at 10:46 AM on March 13, 2009


Yeah, "Underwhelmed" rarely shows up in ringer reviews. Anyone who uses Citysearch is used to seeing that one negative review that was clearly written by a competitor. It's always someone with only that solitary review in their profile, and the review is usually written in all-caps and makes claims like THEY MAKE US WAIT THREE HOURS IN PIT OF RAT DUNG! NO CHICKEN, IT IS FRIED BABBY!
posted by Bookhouse at 10:47 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


This cinnamon roll is underwhelming.

That's because it's not a Cinnabon.
posted by deborah at 10:48 AM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Right of reply : US mefites as Tipping threads : euromefites
posted by Iteki at 11:03 AM on March 13, 2009


Eh? "Right of reply" seems to be about the government forcing me at the point of a gun to allow any entity I elect to talk about to use my web server running on my hardware on my property over my uplink at my cost. "Tipping" is about, you know, paying a fair price for the service you received instead of ripping off people in the food service industry.
posted by majick at 11:09 AM on March 13, 2009


Is there where someone needs to reference the plate of beans.. cause that is what it feels like... a big hullabaloo over nothing.

There is NO right of reply. I wish to hell there was so I could go out and make a living countering all the idiotic claims made by companies who spend millions a years promoting their point of view.

here: "Koon's Honda MADE US WAIT 3 HOURS IN A PIT OF RAT DUNG"
posted by edgeways at 11:21 AM on March 13, 2009


The price of a service is listed on the menu. Tipping is a cultural holdover that only enables the low wages it is meant to supplement.
posted by DU at 11:23 AM on March 13, 2009


Well the AskMe question is the 3rd unique result on Google now, so if they are smart at all, they'll pay $5, wow Irontom and turn it into a positive story for them. Maybe Irontom works for Koon's and this is all part of the plan? :twilight zona tuba:
posted by cashman at 11:35 AM on March 13, 2009


I enjoyed the replies of the opposition when I'm watching news in Australia. It seems like a sort of neat thing when governments do it. Other than that, yeah, odd to my American ears.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:37 AM on March 13, 2009


Australia isn't in Europe.
posted by koeselitz at 11:57 AM on March 13, 2009


That was for iteki and blue_beetle, not jessamyn.
posted by koeselitz at 12:00 PM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


majick, you are simply reinforcing Iteki's post, especially with your delicious 'point of a gun' hyperbole. Do you refer to the notion of everyone driving on the same side of the road the same way?
posted by rodgerd at 12:01 PM on March 13, 2009


And if I wanted a big stainless-steel car, I'd buy a DeLorean.
posted by box at 12:08 PM on March 13, 2009


Australia = Europe's Prison.

/kidding
posted by blue_beetle at 12:10 PM on March 13, 2009


I am just looking for a used car...what is all this?
posted by Jorus at 12:39 PM on March 13, 2009 [1 favorite]


Irked I tells ya!
posted by Mister_A at 1:43 PM on March 13, 2009


"with your delicious 'point of a gun' hyperbole"

I ask with the utmost sincerity as I lack any direct knowledge of European lawmaking customs and am personally disgusted with arguments of willful ignorance: Do European governments routinely enact laws with no intention or means of enforcement? Does sheer human goodwill largely prevail in the absence thereof? That would be awesome and I really do truly hope that's the case, but equally foreign to my experience where enforcement of laws -- particularly laws that grant public rights to private property -- is ultimately by threat of violence, as savage as that may seem to you or I.

"Do you refer to the notion of everyone driving on the same side of the road the same way?"

Well, let's not be silly. The road is a public place, and of course order in public is maintained by threat of violence. I guarantee that driving blithely along the wrong side of the road as though you've the right to do so will in fact get an actual, literal gun pointed at you. Possibly several of them. Perhaps you've never met a cop?
posted by majick at 3:32 PM on March 13, 2009


majick, we have plenty of unfunded mandates in America.
posted by nomisxid at 3:52 PM on March 13, 2009


Koons honda is monolithic in NoVa. Talking about buying a honda here without mentioning Koons is like asking "what cola product might I like?" without mentioning how you feel about Coke.
posted by selfmedicating at 4:19 PM on March 13, 2009


Perhaps you've never met a cop?

I have. New Zealand police are not, for the most part, pansies who are unable to deal with the public except by waving a gun in our face at the drop of a hat.
posted by rodgerd at 1:10 AM on March 14, 2009


LanguageHat: That's crazy talk
Why? I live in a country where right of reply is legally enforceable and used every day by individuals, businesses, organizations etc., and I've yet to see negative side effects. If someone says something wrong about you in public, you get the right to explain yourself in the same channel. If you want to say something damaging about someone in public, just present credible arguments so that your opponent won't be able to ridicule you the next day in the same place. One fundamental idea is that both sides, however unequal they are, have equal access to the playing field. Right of reply doesn't prevent free speech. It makes public speech more responsible, promotes debate in the public space, and has a chilling effect on gratuitous (and particularly partisan) slander. That's how it actually works. Nothing crazy here.
posted by elgilito at 3:18 AM on March 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


I'm surprised how crazy all the americans seem to think right of reply is, when we just had the whole fuss about campaign finance reform. It's the same principle - that our opinions shouldn't be something that can be bought and sold. If Rich Guy can say something about Regular Guy, but no one hears Regular Guy's response because he can't afford the air time, people end up believing Rich Guy, even though they haven't really heard both sides of the argument...
posted by mdn at 6:07 AM on March 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


I really didn't intend to become the face of American astonishment at this "right of reply" thing, but people keep missing out on something fundamental: Americans by and large really, really, really do not like conditional freedom of speech. As much as I'd love to get Rich Guy to tone it down and leave a bit of room for Regular Guy's voice to be heard, I can't even fathom why I'd want that result at the cost of me, Regular Guy, being required by law to provide a forum for Rich Guy to go on about how awesome it is to be Rich.

In the end, all it does is shift cost of media access around, but people miss a fundamental point of modern western societies: Regular Guy is "the media," too. This concept cuts both ways, and I for one don't like the look of the back edge on this thing.
posted by majick at 7:45 AM on March 14, 2009 [1 favorite]


a) I wasn't saying everyone should agree or disagree, just surprised opinions aren't more even, given that Campaign Finance Reform had a lot of support, even though there were plenty of dissenters as well. I'd have thought Right of Reply would be a similar thing: a concern that money controls opinions versus a concern that people ought to be able to spend their money any way they like.

b) to call it "conditional freedom of speech" seems a bit hyperbolic when the only "condition" is that someone else also has a chance to speak. It isn't really putting limits on you; rather it's extending benefits to someone else.
posted by mdn at 2:24 PM on March 14, 2009


I don't think there's any possible common ground here; what is obvious to one group is invisible to the other.
posted by languagehat at 8:55 AM on March 15, 2009


well, what am i missing? I'm not even trying to defend it so much as defend the plausibility of it as reasonable enough to be debatable. I think I can see both sides, in other words. I was only surprised that there was such a heavy skew against it here when what seem like similar arguments are considered rather middle road... why is it so different from campaign finance?
posted by mdn at 7:38 PM on March 15, 2009


Wow - I had no idea this thread even existed. The only reason I found this was reading DU's comment in the Cramer on The Daily Show thread.

I really didn't mean to ruffle feathers. I don't work for them or one of their competitors, for those that were concerned. I kept the details vague because I wasn't sure they were entirely relevant, and I didn't want to throw a ranty tantrum about it.

Having said that: I understand the nature of the dealership experience: they do stuff I can't, and charge me [way too damned much] money for it. I just want a dealership that is happy to take my money. Every time I have been to Koon's, whether for service, information or a test drive, they all act like I am a colossal waste of their precious time. I don't go there very often, so this is rarely an issue, but it's mighty annoying when I utterly must interact with them.
posted by Irontom at 11:51 AM on March 16, 2009


« Older Is it just me, or does the fro...  |  Best Answers on AskMe: If you ... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments