Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If he's not going to eat it then it should not be on his plate. Putting stuff on your plate you can't eat is just willfully depriving the restaurateur of their livelihood.


It's not greedy if he doesn't eat it; it's just downright insulting, morally bankrupt.


Read the dog in the manger: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dog_in_the_Manger


It's 'as much as you can eat' not 'as much as you can take home'.

In theory you have paid for an all you can eat so you could clear out the whole restaurant - you'd be quite the **** if you did tho


Scaling back from that scenario and thinking "well i won't finish this but I can get another meal or two out of it" times another 10 customers doing the same? probably affecting not just that restaurater but others in the area too


pay your ?6.95, eat as much as you can and leave - that's the sprit of the thing. If people abuse it resutaurants will stop doing it

You haven't paid for a plate of food t-e-d, you've paid for as much as you can eat.


If you put more on your plate than you could eat, you're simply trying to rip off the system - so your tone of outrage is completely unreasonable, the swindler here is you not me!

Huguenot may or may not have but I have many a time


If I was going to take them to an all you can eat I would listen to what they SAIDF they wanted and given them a small sample - if they wanted more I would go back and get more.


baby steps, Ted. baby steps


If they didn't eat more than twice I just wouldn't take them again and tell them why

baby steps means I wouldn't go from "taste" to "plateful"


but if they went back for more and didn't eat it, regardless of size, then if it happened more thhan once, then as I say "I just wouldn't take them again and tell them why"


but taking the food away wouldn't be my main concern

Ah, I didn't realize you were talking about small children - but I guess if you want a good deal from a fixed price 'all you can eat' buffet, you don't take a small child?


You know that they're not going to eat their money's worth.


It's not the nature of the deal. You still can't take it home.


No pointing getting outraged about it.

Thing is with children Is they do do annoying things. If you acted the way you suggest "You are are never going there again" By the time they are 12 you wouldn't be able to go anywhere or do anything. You have to be patient and persist. Anyway this is on the wrong thread.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...