935
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2023
935 points (94.1% liked)
Asklemmy
43974 readers
740 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I think it's less that we're expected to sympathize, and more just that they've realized enough people will tolerate it. With OP's example, Taco Bell has clearly decided that whatever business they may lose due to people deciding to not go to Taco Bell anymore because of the lack of napkins will be less than whatever they save by not stocking napkins anymore.
And they're right.
Don't get me wrong, it's a shitty thing to do, but between people in general not realizing that this place doesn't even have napkins anymore, and people deciding they still want semi-delicious garbage tacos anyway, they're really not going to see a big dip in revenue. They've simply realized that they really can just make their presented experience a little shittier just to save some money.
Well first off have Taco Bell stopped providing napkins? One person couldn't find napkins in one store and suddenly it's greed driven corporate policy according to OP?
It seems unlikely that a food chain would completely abolish napkins. It is possible they're no longer freely available because people were taking them "for their car" whatever that even means!?
Perhaps I should have clarified that for the sake of discussion I was taking OP's comment at face value, but the essentials are the same either way. Whether it's a chain-wide declaration that napkins are done, a single store doing away with them, or just a sufficiently casual attitude to restocking them that allowed them to run out in the first place, the math in the end is all the same. They can and will let their service get a little shittier, because they know they'll save more money than they lose.