Apples and oranges. If you are a cashier and theft occurs you aren’t paid enough to risk anything, including your life, to stop theft. Companies can hire more asset protection people.
Absolutely. Shoving a wall of text in someone’s face that you didn’t type and saying “read this” is not worth my time.
If you want effort, put forth effort. I can also link to a plethora of stuff and say “read this,” but I won’t because it’s a waste of time and you can find any information you want on the internet.
Sorry this needs to be spelled out for you. You’ll understand it as you get older.
Damn dude, do you gotta be a cunt on the internet for no reason or is it fun? They’ve been saying that same “you’ll get it when you’re older” since I was in school and that’s been a minute. Normally it came from some small minded blowhards, but I’ll give you benefit of the doubt.
Their effort was to find the sources for you that purport their claim. It’s not a big nuanced argument, they presented what they thought, you asked a question about what they meant, they linked you supporting information so you could be aware.
It’s not their job to dissect the sources for you, it’s their job to present their argument and if you didn’t get it then they link you the bits they used. If you still don’t get it, stop engaging with the person who linked sources.
When you were in school, did they teach you how to evaluate sources from multiple forms of media? Because the internet wasn’t as massive as it is today when I was taking those classes, but they still taught how to go through a magazine, website, book, and video sources to identify the bias and reliability of the source.
If the only conversations you’re having a full text and no one is linking to a source when they’re making a claim, you’re having a conversation, not a discussion or debate. It’s why people cite their sources for published pieces, gotta check for plagiarism and you have to identify where you got information you claim is factual, it’s just part of having those kinds of communications.
Look dude, I get it. You seem upset because I don’t see the value in being linked a wall of text on the internet. It’s because I’ve been there, many times, and it overwhelmingly is not worth taking seriously.
Like I said, you’ll understand this when you have more experience. I’m tired of repeating myself, and taking your insults.
get some cashiers!
Apples and oranges. If you are a cashier and theft occurs you aren’t paid enough to risk anything, including your life, to stop theft. Companies can hire more asset protection people.
In Canada off-duty cops do that job AND get those hours added onto their retirement fund … that we taxpayers pay for.
#ACAB
What? I like using self-checkout.
3 and 4 in this article with sources. https://dealaid.org/data/self-checkout/
https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-employees-and-customers-blame-self-checkout-shoplifting-rising-theft-2022-12
aka skip scanning
Sorry, I’m not reading any of that.
Would you like to use your words and tell me what you want to say?
He was giving you sources so you could understand his viewpoint and see if it holds merit outside of anecdotal experience.
Do you think the way you responded fosters good faith conversation?
Absolutely. Shoving a wall of text in someone’s face that you didn’t type and saying “read this” is not worth my time.
If you want effort, put forth effort. I can also link to a plethora of stuff and say “read this,” but I won’t because it’s a waste of time and you can find any information you want on the internet.
Sorry this needs to be spelled out for you. You’ll understand it as you get older.
Damn dude, do you gotta be a cunt on the internet for no reason or is it fun? They’ve been saying that same “you’ll get it when you’re older” since I was in school and that’s been a minute. Normally it came from some small minded blowhards, but I’ll give you benefit of the doubt.
Their effort was to find the sources for you that purport their claim. It’s not a big nuanced argument, they presented what they thought, you asked a question about what they meant, they linked you supporting information so you could be aware.
It’s not their job to dissect the sources for you, it’s their job to present their argument and if you didn’t get it then they link you the bits they used. If you still don’t get it, stop engaging with the person who linked sources.
When you were in school, did they teach you how to evaluate sources from multiple forms of media? Because the internet wasn’t as massive as it is today when I was taking those classes, but they still taught how to go through a magazine, website, book, and video sources to identify the bias and reliability of the source.
If the only conversations you’re having a full text and no one is linking to a source when they’re making a claim, you’re having a conversation, not a discussion or debate. It’s why people cite their sources for published pieces, gotta check for plagiarism and you have to identify where you got information you claim is factual, it’s just part of having those kinds of communications.
Look dude, I get it. You seem upset because I don’t see the value in being linked a wall of text on the internet. It’s because I’ve been there, many times, and it overwhelmingly is not worth taking seriously.
Like I said, you’ll understand this when you have more experience. I’m tired of repeating myself, and taking your insults.
I’m gonna block you now. Goodbye.