(Untitled)

[irisira03]

Not an incredibly big stupid (yet - but it has potential), but lots of little gems for your morning coffee:

Over in bad_service, silentsymphonie posts about an allegedy neglectful waitress who (almost) made them too late for a homecoming dance. This is not the stupid, per se.

The stupid comes with visionofclarity, who, as a speshulsnowflake former waitress, says, "Just because your

Comments

[flaxen_curls]

Well they make a good point. If you're in a rush, then don't ask for things that you know are going to take extra time. Duh.

[lavender_eve]

three seperate checks should only take a few minutes extra and is easy to do if the order is rung in correctly. processing a credit card only takes as long as it would take to make change.

[flaxen_curls]

Yeah, take a few minutes extra. Hence, why not choose the quickest option when you're in a rush? And processing a credit card does take longer. It typically involves two trips and the waiting time while the receipt is printed to be signed. Cash can be changed at the table. And if you have correct change, then it takes all of 2 seconds to get up and leave!

[lavender_eve]

processing a credit card isn't hard and only involves walking over and swiping it. most restaurants frown upon making change at the table. how do you know how much the bill is going to be when you arrive at the restaurant? it should take under three minutes to cash out a table maybe one or two more, if they all need change or have credit cards, for seperate checks. besides the OP wasn't complaining about how long it took the server to cash her out. she was complaining that it took her fifteen minutes to even be bothered to cash her out.

[knoxedamia]

I'm hungry

[keenwit]

Not reading the entire post is typical over at bad_service. I'm a reader of both customers_suck & bad_service, and you can tell who comes from which community to snark the other. I've posted just one bad service post, and people replied to only half of my post, ignoring the other half completely. Let's whatever this.

[anothertwoam]

Same here. My only post was legit bad service, but I had people attacking me for the example of previous NON-suckage I used to support my story as well as generally not reading. It was very wtf. o_O

[irisira03]

I thought that was funny. "Wait, you waited til a few minutes til nine?" No. They asked at 8:30 and the check was finally processed at a few minutes til nine. My reading comprehension, let me show you it.

[syn_abounds]

So twenty-five of my closest friends and I...

Does this statement seem a bit stupid to anyone else?

[rissie]

Like the introduction to a bad porno? That's what I was thinking.

[shemale]

Introduction to an amusing porno, you mean.

[rissie]

..interesting..

[dodgy_mermaid]

I agree that the kids should have given themselves more time for dining, and allowed for the possibility of checks taking a while to process.... But people saying that the server is blameless need a reality check. The waitress was having a cute fifteen-minute gossip when she should have been handling the kids' checks! The leet servers at some of the restaurants in my area would laugh and shake their heads at this silliness.

[joereaves]

If she'd known they were in a rush, sure, but most people really aren't in a hurry when it comes to the check and like to linger over their coffee and such. Fifteen minutes doesn't really strike me as unusual as an amount of time between asking for the check and getting out of there, but yeah if she was just talking to another table she should have checked back. On the other hand if she was close enough that they could tell she was chatting for all that time why didn't one of them just interrupt and say 'I'm sorry to interrupt but we need to be somewhere'.

I'm a little suspicious though because every time I hear anyone complain about how long they've waited for something time takes on a kind of elastic property. Fifteen minutes usually means five.

[dodgy_mermaid]

I expect that group didn't interrupt the waitress' little gab session because...well...they are teenagers. Many kids that age are still reluctant to interrupt adults' conversations. (I am assuming, here, that the customers were good kids. I tells yeh, me and my faith in people....) Because the waitress was probably not one of their peers, they may have regarded her as an adult even if she was fairly young. They may have been so intimidated by what could have been their first "grown-up" dining experience that flagging down the waitress did not occur to them.

Yeah, that may seem far-fetched, but I am judging largely by my own feelings when I was their age.... Was raised to be so polite that I didn't always know when to stand up for myself. Heh.

And I agree that fifteen minutes usually means five (elastic property; nice!), but my instinct tells me the OP did not exaggerate. I've seen some horrible servers who did that kind of thing to me, and a discreet trip to the restroom showed me that our waitress was just gossiping with a

[joereaves]

They didn't seem to have any problem calling another server over in the hopes he could take the check so I don't know if they were intimidated or not. *shrug* If everything the poster says is true then yes it was mildly bad service I agree, but it could have been avoided with a little more planning (really 2 hours isn't all that bad to get all their tables served) and not splitting the checks at what sounded like the last minute. The OP says all the other tables got out before they did; I'm inclined to wonder how many of them split the check into three.

(I must admit I am less inclined to agree with her too much after her first reply to a comment of 'Bzzt! Wrong!' when someone disagreed with her. It came across as rude which automatically made me assume she was an idiot.)