*** The Official CUCKposting thread ***

[MadMojoMonkey]

I was working as a carpenter and someone used construction glue to cement my radio to my workbench. We pranked each other a lot, so that didn't really bother me.
Thing is that in order to move the radio, it had to be destroyed.

When I told the owner of the company that I'm fine with a prank, but this had destroyed my radio, and I want it replaced, preferably by the person who pranked me.

The owner started to lecture me about personal responsibility, and I cut him off and asked, "Isn't it the responsibility of the person whose prank caused destruction of my property?"

He got all red-faced and fired me for not letting him lecture me.

I collected unemployment for 6 months after that. What was his "cause" aside from, presumably, my belligerence (from his POV)?


IDK the exact laws, but I fail to see why that employer wouldn't fabricate any old story to blame me for the loss of my job.

[BananaStand]

IDK the exact laws, but I fail to see why that employer wouldn't fabricate any old story to blame me for the loss of my job.

When you file for unemployment benefits, the gov't will send a letter informing your former employer that a claim has been made against his insurance (that's what unemployment is, it's an insurance program, not a tax. Important distinction).

He has the option to contest it, saying that you were fired for cause. He would only do this to prevent his insurance rates from going up, or if he wanted to be a dick to you.

The government is then caught in the middle of a he-said/monkey-said situation. So they have to investigate. They are going to ask for forms filled out, and statements, depositions, blah blah blah blah. And when you consider that actual $ impact of one layoff on insurance rates, it's FAR more expedient for your former employer to just let it go.

[Poopadoop]

I was working as a carpenter and someone used construction glue to cement my radio to my workbench. We pranked each other a lot, so that didn't really bother me.
Thing is that in order to move the radio, it had to be destroyed.

When I told the owner of the company that I'm fine with a prank, but this had destroyed my radio, and I want it replaced, preferably by the person who pranked me.

The owner started to lecture me about personal responsibility, and I cut him off and asked, "Isn't it the responsibility of the person whose prank caused destruction of my property?"

He got all red-faced and fired me for not letting him lecture me.

I collected unemployment for 6 months after that. What was his "cause" aside from, presumably, my belligerence (from his POV)?


IDK the exact laws, but I fail to see why that employer wouldn't fabricate any old story to blame me for the loss of my job.

First, never use logic with someone in authority. That's the wrong approach.

Second, did you ask prank-boy first to replace ur stereo? Because if you do and he says 'lol no way' then file that in your head and destroy something of his later so he gets the point that you're not to be fucked with.

Third, taking your petty shit to the boss doesn't deserve a firing. But, assuming you don't have time to take up with the labor authority, probably better to just let it go than seeking justice.

Edit: also, what banana said. An employer is generally not motivated to fight it out in these circumstances.

[wufwugy]

Second, did you ask prank-boy first to replace ur stereo? Because if you do and he says 'lol no way' then file that in your head and destroy something of his later so he gets the point that you're not to be fucked with.

That can work but I see it usually blowing up. Somebody who would destroy a stereo on a prank and not offer to pay for it immediately is the kind of person who can dish it out but cant take it.

[BananaStand]

That can work but I see it usually blowing up. Somebody who would destroy a stereo on a prank and not offer to pay for it immediately is the kind of person who can dish it out but cant take it.

Somehow I think we're missing some elements to this story. Sounds like there were more bullies than pranksters working in this shop.

[Poopadoop]

That can work but I see it usually blowing up. Somebody who would destroy a stereo on a prank and not offer to pay for it immediately is the kind of person who can dish it out but cant take it.

Well if he's the type to escalate to lacing your lunch with ebola, you're probably right. In that case it becomes a bit more tricky.

In my experience pranking is done within boundaries that both parties respect. Bullying has only two outcomes: defy the bully or submit to more bullying.

[wufwugy]

Well if he's the type to escalate to lacing your lunch with ebola, you're probably right. In that case it becomes a bit more tricky.

In my experience pranking is done within boundaries that both parties respect. Bullying has only two outcomes: defy the bully or submit to more bullying.

I have been successful with a third option, but it's something I'm good at doing and I always dislike it when somebody says "here's what I would do" so I didn't want to do that. The third option is to change the frame with the bully. Befriend the bully, give him reason to like you and respect you, make him feel like you like him and respect him. Then you can impart on him that you don't want to be pranked like that. Unless his IQ is lower than you think BStand's is, he'd usually listen.

[Poopadoop]

I have been successful with a third option, but it's something I'm good at doing and I always dislike it when somebody says "here's what I would do" so I didn't want to do that. The third option is to change the frame with the bully. Befriend the bully, give him reason to like you and respect you, make him feel like you like him and respect him. Then you can impart on him that you don't want to be pranked like that. Unless his IQ is lower than you think BStand's is, he'd usually listen.

I agree more or less. The only caveat would be that the third option can be time-consuming and/or soul-destroying. But if you are dealing with a bully for whom standing up for yourself only gets you beat up , then yeah schmoozing them can be an optimal strategy. In my experience standing up generally has some meta-game advantage in that other bullies know not to play you the same way.

I would add that I don't think Banana has a low IQ; I think it is above average. But IQ is not everything, otherwise we would all just agree with MMM or Ong all the time. IOW, I don't think that IQ necessarily relates to the value of arguments.

The value of an argument should have nothing to do with who you are arguing with and what you think of their intellect. Even if Spoon or one of his alter egos came on here and argued MAGA HOLY FUCK and followed it with some reasoned analysis of why we should all be shouting MAGA Holy Fuck that had some appeal to reason, I hope that I would be open to entertaining it.

[BananaStand]

I would add that I don't think Banana has a low IQ; I think it is above average.

I scored 135 on the WAIS III

[Savy]

I would add that I don't think Banana has a low IQ; I think it is above average. But IQ is not everything, otherwise we would all just agree with MMM or Ong all the time.

I'm confused as to why you picked those two for your example and not me? I've proved I'm the smartest person on ftr.