[Annoy] What's something small that really annoys you?

Forums › Off topic › [Annoy] What's something small that really annoys you?

1 | ... | 521 | 522 | 523 | 524 | 525 | 526 | 527 | 528 | 529 | 530 | 531 | ... | 1828

2418 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2290045 5-Aug-2019 10:13

The Warehouse continued...

You guessed it!

Another sweatshirt (Un-ordered) arrived today!

Finally spoken to "Management", told the saga.

Pointed out that they really need a way to provide the customer proof that an item has been returned!

He admitted that they currently have no way to do this! (Obviously never heard of a manual receipt book!)

Will be returning this one on Saturday to their Riccarton store!

How much longer can they stay in business at this rate! (I am only 1 case!)

Handsomedan

7293 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2290108 5-Aug-2019 10:55

Pet Peeve #147:

People driving on the motorway at 60km/h. Causes frustration, dangerous driving and aggression in those that are stuck behind or near them...

If you can't cope with Motorways, don't enter them. The speed limit is 100km/h - the general expectation is that if the conditions allow, you'll be travelling at or about 100km/h.

60-70km/h is unacceptable...if I drove 30-40km/h OVER the limit I'd get nicked pretty quickly.

Handsome Dan Has Spoken.
Handsome Dan needs to stop adding three dots to every sentence...

Handsome Dan does not currently have a side hustle as the mascot for Yale

*Gladly accepting donations...

richms

28176 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2290348 5-Aug-2019 16:25

Handsomedan:

Pet Peeve #147:

People driving on the motorway at 60km/h. Causes frustration, dangerous driving and aggression in those that are stuck behind or near them...

If you can't cope with Motorways, don't enter them. The speed limit is 100km/h - the general expectation is that if the conditions allow, you'll be travelling at or about 100km/h.

60-70km/h is unacceptable...if I drove 30-40km/h OVER the limit I'd get nicked pretty quickly.

The sad state of some of the allowable recently imported cars is probably the reason. Used to be nissan marches, now its demios and cubes that seem to be unable to accelerate to or maintain 100-110kmh without a tailwind and a downhill.

Richard rich.ms

GSManiac

488 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2290685 6-Aug-2019 08:30

Ladies in open toed shoes whose feet over hang the shoe.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2290694 6-Aug-2019 08:52

Handsomedan:
Pet Peeve #147:

People driving on the motorway at 60km/h. Causes frustration, dangerous driving and aggression in those that are stuck behind or near them...

If you can't cope with Motorways, don't enter them. The speed limit is 100km/h - the general expectation is that if the conditions allow, you'll be travelling at or about 100km/h.

60-70km/h is unacceptable...if I drove 30-40km/h OVER the limit I'd get nicked pretty quickly.

Probably a good job that they aren't really proper motorways, with a speed limit higher than other roads!

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#2290992 6-Aug-2019 15:20

richms:

The sad state of some of the allowable recently imported cars is probably the reason. Used to be nissan marches, now its demios and cubes that seem to be unable to accelerate to or maintain 100-110kmh without a tailwind and a downhill.

You're joking of course.

Basically any car - including those examples - is perfectly capable of accelerating to 110km and holding that speed indefinitely. Many decades ago (early '80s) my MIL had an 800cc Suzuki "alto"?) that could sit on 100km all day. I expect it would have been a death trap if you hit something - and pretty cramped, but no problem keeping up with traffic. Even an early 60s Mini 850 was pretty happy cruising at 100km/h.

The reason that the vehicles you cite "seem to be unable" is choice by the owners who'd possibly gravitate toward buying cars that "lack performance" .

Some heavy trucks up hills, old buses, step-through scooters and vintage cars - maybe.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18660 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2290997 6-Aug-2019 15:33

I once was the unhappy owner of a 1958 English Ford Anglia, one of the worst-designed and worst-made cars ever manufactured. This four cylinder piece of junk had three gears. The first two were nearly identical. The third was a huge jump upwards. I don't know the ratios, but it meant that the car could not go faster than 20 mph uphill in second with the engine screaming at top speed, but it would stall when I tried to shift into third. I had a long, miserable commute uphill going home every evening, and a long line of very unhappy cars behind me as there was no place to overtake. God I hated that car! I finally got my revenge when I drove it over a cliff and traded it to someone for a stuffed dog. Someone remarked at the time that it was the first time he ever saw both parties to a deal get screwed.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2291063 6-Aug-2019 16:58

Fred99:
richms:

The sad state of some of the allowable recently imported cars is probably the reason. Used to be nissan marches, now its demios and cubes that seem to be unable to accelerate to or maintain 100-110kmh without a tailwind and a downhill.

You're joking of course.

Basically any car - including those examples - is perfectly capable of accelerating to 110km and holding that speed indefinitely. Many decades ago (early '80s) my MIL had an 800cc Suzuki "alto"?) that could sit on 100km all day. I expect it would have been a death trap if you hit something - and pretty cramped, but no problem keeping up with traffic. Even an early 60s Mini 850 was pretty happy cruising at 100km/h.

The reason that the vehicles you cite "seem to be unable" is choice by the owners who'd possibly gravitate toward buying cars that "lack performance" .

Some heavy trucks up hills, old buses, step-through scooters and vintage cars - maybe.

Ahh the glorious Suzuki Alto the car I learnt to drive in. 795cc pure power... Mangaged to get it to 132kmh on motorway once.

Weighed next to nothing which meant university students picked it up and moved it around once. But great fun passing bogged down land rovers on river banks in Canterbury...

Left the family after 200k km.

richms

28176 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2291069 6-Aug-2019 17:07

Fred99:

richms:

The sad state of some of the allowable recently imported cars is probably the reason. Used to be nissan marches, now its demios and cubes that seem to be unable to accelerate to or maintain 100-110kmh without a tailwind and a downhill.

You're joking of course.

Basically any car - including those examples - is perfectly capable of accelerating to 110km and holding that speed indefinitely. Many decades ago (early '80s) my MIL had an 800cc Suzuki "alto"?) that could sit on 100km all day. I expect it would have been a death trap if you hit something - and pretty cramped, but no problem keeping up with traffic. Even an early 60s Mini 850 was pretty happy cruising at 100km/h.

Not really. Friend ended up with a march as a rental from a cheap place, and it was so underpowered it was dangerous with 3 or 4 people in it. They are not the same as the micra, there are some seriously small engines in them. Would have been well over 12 seconds 0 to 100 times at onramp lights which made it so it was barely fast enough at the end of the ramp. Perhaps it was broken. Perhaps its because it had 91 in it when it shouldnt have, I dont know the exact reason, the end result was that the person who rented it hated it, felt unsafe in it and it seemed that we drove it faster than others in similar cars on the road drove them.

Richard rich.ms

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18660 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2292225 8-Aug-2019 12:02

An annoyance that has recently re-emerged is big institutions and companies that have never discovered email and insist on communicating by phone. Not everyone is able or wants to answer every call as soon as it comes in. So it goes to voicemail. So you get the message and ring back because someone leaves a number and says they want to talk to you. When you ring back you are made to wait a half-hour listening to a scratchy, tinny version of someone's granddaughter's taste in music that would be grating even if the fidelity was any good. Finally you get through to a voicemail that asks you to leave a message. So you do. An hour or a day later there is a voicemail on your phone saying someone rang and asking you to ring back. And so on and so on. This endless back and forth annoys me on many levels, but I guess the main one is just the sheer pointless stupidity of it. Why can't big institutions learn that this is wasteful for them as well as irritating for the people they are trying to communicate with? What makes email so much better is the timeless factor. You don't have to be present at the same time in order to receive the information that needs to be conveyed. You can reply to it and know that your reply will be received when it suits the other party. Why is this so hard to understand?

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

richms

28176 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2292227 8-Aug-2019 12:08

Rikkitic:

An annoyance that has recently re-emerged is big institutions and companies that have never discovered email and insist on communicating by phone. Not everyone is able or wants to answer every call as soon as it comes in. So it goes to voicemail. So you get the message and ring back because someone leaves a number and says they want to talk to you. When you ring back you are made to wait a half-hour listening to a scratchy, tinny version of someone's granddaughter's taste in music that would be grating even if the fidelity was any good. Finally you get through to a voicemail that asks you to leave a message. So you do. An hour or a day later there is a voicemail on your phone saying someone rang and asking you to ring back. And so on and so on. This endless back and forth annoys me on many levels, but I guess the main one is just the sheer pointless stupidity of it. Why can't big institutions learn that this is wasteful for them as well as irritating for the people they are trying to communicate with? What makes email so much better is the timeless factor. You don't have to be present at the same time in order to receive the information that needs to be conveyed. You can reply to it and know that your reply will be received when it suits the other party. Why is this so hard to understand?

Remove your voicemail from your phone. Any business that cant email or sms their customers deserves a quick painful death by commercial suicide.

Richard rich.ms

Rikkitic

Awrrr
18660 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2292234 8-Aug-2019 12:14

We only just got voicemail on the phone as a result of changing VoIP provider. Voicemail or no, I don't see why organisations can't learn to use email.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos