Microsoft shortens Windows name

The Chief wrote:
I didn't propose that anyone sue anyone else.
The only point I've been trying to make is that 180'F is
incredibly stupid for coffee. It exposes the customers -
and the servers, for that matter - to the risk of
unnecessarily severe burns when accidents happen as they
inevitably will. And nobody has posted anything yet that
suggests that there are any benefits to 180'F coffee that
come close to justifying the risks.


--
Reply to
Do not remove anything.



im in the food service business
and most places their coffee is served at +\- 192 deg F

so 180 is cold


The incredibly stupid individuals are the ones trying to justify their
own stupidity. The vast majority of comments posted to this thread have
done nothing to demonstrate any logic or intelligence. They're only
trying to justify their own ignorance and stupidity, and why they should
blame someone else for their inability to take responsibility for their
own actions!

My mother, and other relatives, taught me when I was very young that hot
things burn. So, no matter where I purchased a hot cup of coffee I was
fully aware it had the capability to burn me and if I spilt it on
myself! It was my fault if I did, not someone else's!

Water boils at 212F or 100C. So, when you brew a pot of coffee at home
the water that is run over the coffee grounds is initially 212F! Do you

Not in this house : It wrecks the flavour. Apparently the ideal temp
somewhere around 90C.

test it and wait until it is 130F before you drink it? I don't! It
would be like drinking **** water at that point. But, I don pour it on
my lap either!

You make it sound like it's a voluntary action. It might not be...

Someone might knocks your elbow.
Perhaps there's a small earthquake.
Perhaps something falling displaces the cup into your lap.
.... The list goes on ...
Maybe your grip on the cup simply is not good enough...

Watch people picking up super-hot beverages in disposable containers.
Sometimes you will see their grip readjust rapidly (risking spillage)
because their fingertips are getting burnt... That's just stupidity in
action, too hot to drink, too hot to handle, and too damn hot as far
as flavour goes.


Cheers,
Rupert

Locutus wrote:

I didn't propose that anyone sue anyone else.
The only point I've been trying to make is that 180'F is
incredibly stupid for coffee. It exposes the customers -
and the servers, for that matter - to the risk of
unnecessarily severe burns when accidents happen as they
inevitably will. And nobody has posted anything yet that
suggests that there are any benefits to 180'F coffee that
come close to justifying the risks.


--
Reply to
Do not remove anything.


im in the food service business
and most places their coffee is served at +\- 192 deg F

so 180 is cold



Bull****. At 192'F you would be waiting until
hell freezes over before the coffee was cool enough
to drink. The fact of the matter is that just about
every where you go the coffee is cool enough for at
least small sips as soon as it is poured into your
cup.


--
Reply to
Do not remove anything.

"Rob Stow" wrote in message news:37O_c.325298$gE.13907@pd7tw3no...
Locutus wrote:

I didn't propose that anyone sue anyone else.
The only point I've been trying to make is that 180'F is
incredibly stupid for coffee. It exposes the customers -
and the servers, for that matter - to the risk of
unnecessarily severe burns when accidents happen as they
inevitably will. And nobody has posted anything yet that
suggests that there are any benefits to 180'F coffee that
come close to justifying the risks.


--
Reply to
Do not remove anything.


im in the food service business
and most places their coffee is served at +\- 192 deg F

so 180 is cold



Bull****. At 192'F you would be waiting until
hell freezes over before the coffee was cool enough
to drink. The fact of the matter is that just about
every where you go the coffee is cool enough for at
least small sips as soon as it is poured into your
cup.




go to starbucks and ask or go anywhere and ask
you are clueless

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:54:44 +0100, Rupert Pigott wrote:

keith wrote:
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:03:38 +0000, Rob Stow wrote:


keith wrote:

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 14:29:32 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:



In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips MyndPhlyp wrote:


http://www.liberator.net/articles/Va...nsibility.html

Very nice, but I wouldn't consider debridement to be required
for "minor burns". Especially not on the vulva (ouch!)

IMHO, Wikipedia is a bit more authoratative:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald's_coffee_case

It _is_ an interesting question of responsibility:

1) coffee is customarily served at 150-160'F
2) McD coffee was deliberately served at 180-190'F
(presumably for competitive advantage -- staying warm longer
or to use cheaper coffee beans)


Competative advantage? Perhaps competative pressure. A friend had a
Dunkin' Donuts franchise and we were talking about this issue when it hit
the presses. They were *required* by franchise agreement to keep their
coffee at 180F +/- 3F. The corporate inspectors would show up unnanounced
and measure the temperature. They were heavily fined if it was
out-of-spec. Contrary to the claims in this thread 180F is not unusual for
coffee.


There is no excuse for coffee that hot. It will be
interesting to see what happens if one of your friend's
customers needs a skin graft after spilling his coffee.
"I vas chust following orders" is not an acceptable
excuse for blatant stupidity so I would expect your
friend to be personally liable.


3) who is to blame for the resulting burns?


The ass that put the cup in their lap. Dunno about you, but I'm smart
enough not to get even 150F water near my johnson!

You've never had an accident ? Nobody has ever spilled
their coffee on you or caused you to spill yours on
yourself ?


Sure, but I don't *ASK* for it by putting a cup of hot water in my crotch
just *waiting* for the pain. Good grief, think man!

And 150 or 160 degrees or is no big deal


You stick your dick in it! It's a big deal to me. I don't care if it's
150F or 180F, I'm not going to ask for such pain. Sure, I've spilled
coffee on myself, but I don't put the damned cup between my legs! Perhaps
you're that stupid, but I leaned hot water is *hot* when I was a wee
child.

Think about this : You've got your cup of superheated McD's coffee

You really do like to *lie*, don't you Rupert. You know as well as I do
that the coffee in question was in *no* way "superheated" (a term that is
very well defined). 180F does not fit *any* definiton of "superheated".
Hot, sure, but that's what the customer (*me*) demands.

in one hand and you are getting into your car. Just as you sit down and
you are carefully moving your superheated
^^^^^^^^^^^-- there's that lie again.

cup of coffee to a place well
away from your genitals some mother****er rear ends your parked car and
you end up with this unnecessarily hot cup of coffee in your crotch
anyways.

....and according to everythign you've written in the past six months,
"it's George Bush's fault", eh?

Sure you'd probably litigate against the careless driver, but if you had
any sense at all you'd litigate against the ****ers who made coffee so
hot that an incidient beyond your control boiled your ********.

SPeak for yourself! I would no longer litigate against the driver, nor
Mackie-D's as long as I was made whole. Litigation is for losers. It
makes everyone poorer, other than the lawyers.

Superficially that case did sound stupid, but when the details did
actually emerge it appears McDs were being practically homicidal.

I would expect this attitude from a slave to the state. Here in the US
some of us ae trying to get people stand on their own feet.

--
Keith

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 18:29:43 -0400, The Chief wrote:

I didn't propose that anyone sue anyone else.
The only point I've been trying to make is that 180'F is
incredibly stupid for coffee. It exposes the customers -
and the servers, for that matter - to the risk of
unnecessarily severe burns when accidents happen as they
inevitably will. And nobody has posted anything yet that
suggests that there are any benefits to 180'F coffee that
come close to justifying the risks.


--
Reply to
Do not remove anything.


im in the food service business
and most places their coffee is served at +\- 192 deg F

so 180 is cold


The incredibly stupid individuals are the ones trying to justify their
own stupidity.

Blame *must* be placed. ...elsewhere! Honest people will accept the
blame and assume the *responsibility* for their mistakes. Only the
terminally stupid (and otherwise French) blame others for personal faults.

The vast majority of comments posted to this thread have
done nothing to demonstrate any logic or intelligence. They're only
trying to justify their own ignorance and stupidity, and why they should
blame someone else for their inability to take responsibility for their
own actions!

Agreed! Hot water burns! If you can't deal with it, get an iced latte
from Dn' D. I'm just waiting for a frost-bite suit here.

My mother, and other relatives, taught me when I was very young that hot
things burn. So, no matter where I purchased a hot cup of coffee I was
fully aware it had the capability to burn me and if I spilt it on
myself! It was my fault if I did, not someone else's!

Exactly. However the liberal poofs believe that there is no such thing as
"personal responsibility", whether it be hot water, or raising children.

Water boils at 212F or 100C. So, when you brew a pot of coffee at home
the water that is run over the coffee grounds is initially 212F! Do you
test it and wait until it is 130F before you drink it? I don't! It
would be like drinking **** water at that point. But, I don pour it on
my lap either!

So, if 180F is incredibly stupid for coffee, then it must be
Fahrenheit's fault for devising a temperature scale that indicated 212F
was the boiling point of water!

As I've said in may of these arguments; 180F is a *normal* serving
temperature for coffee. Of course after this crap started we started
seeing stickers on brewers such as "coffee served at hot temperatures". I
think this says it all. ...the illiterate and the stupid.

--
Keith

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 16:39:51 +0000, Robert Redelmeier wrote:

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips keith wrote:
Certainly. I scream and curse *myself* for being so
*stupid*. ...rather like I do when I mash my thimb with
a hammer. I don't run out ans sue Stanleeey because they
sold me a 20oz. hammer, when the "standard" hammer is 16oz.

Ah, but when you bought that 20oz, there were almost certainly
16oz'ers present, and that 20oz may have even been called
"heravyweight" or "hefty" or "supersized".

There are at Mickie-D's too! They even sell 8-ox cups, for some strange
and unkown reason! (it takes 16ox. to even wake up enough to taste the
coffee). BTW, McD's coffee sucks. D-n-D's is barely drinkable.

BTW, a 20oz faming hammer is rather standard at HomeDespot, even 24oz. I
simply can't wait for John Edwards to figure out how dangerous these
places really are!

I'd have no problem if McD (and Dunkin' apparently at that time) were to
say "We serve our coffee hotter than normal so you can enjoy it longer"
or some other such warning that there was an unusual hazard.

It's _hidden_ hazards that I decry.

But he hazard is *not* hidden. I surely hope your mother didn't raise you
to be stupid enough to put *any* coffee cup in your crotch. ...and I
thought you to be the "reasonable man".

--
Keith

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 06:00:55 +0000, Rob Stow wrote:

keith wrote:
On Sat, 04 Sep 2004 17:03:38 +0000, Rob Stow wrote:



Sure, but I don't *ASK* for it by putting a cup of hot water in my crotch
just *waiting* for the pain. Good grief, think man!

What the heck is this obsession with coffee and your crotch ?

If you have to ask this question, you are *NOT* paying attention. GO read
the thread (and links) again. I'm sure you'll figure it out the second
time through.

--
Keith

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 00:24:31 +0000, Rob Stow wrote:

Bull****. At 192'F you would be waiting until
hell freezes over before the coffee was cool enough
to drink. The fact of the matter is that just about
every where you go the coffee is cool enough for at
least small sips as soon as it is poured into your
cup.

Talking about BS, The few times I've drank coffee in th last 40years, I've
always, and I mean always, had to put ice cubes in it to cool it down.
Probably wouldn.t need to if I used cream or milk. But screw those people,
serve it colder so when they add add cream and suger and stir it up it
will be cold.

--
Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm

keith wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:54:44 +0100, Rupert Pigott wrote:

[SNIP]

Think about this : You've got your cup of superheated McD's coffee


You really do like to *lie*, don't you Rupert. You know as well as I do

It's called humour. I figure you're attacking it because you actually
have no valid response to the core argument in this post.

that the coffee in question was in *no* way "superheated" (a term that is
very well defined). 180F does not fit *any* definiton of "superheated".
Hot, sure, but that's what the customer (*me*) demands.


in one hand and you are getting into your car. Just as you sit down and
you are carefully moving your superheated

^^^^^^^^^^^-- there's that lie again.

Oh blimey ! Humour isn't allowed by decree of Keith.

cup of coffee to a place well
away from your genitals some mother****er rear ends your parked car and
you end up with this unnecessarily hot cup of coffee in your crotch
anyways.


...and according to everythign you've written in the past six months,
"it's George Bush's fault", eh?

Jeez, that *is* desperate. You managed to combine a an ad hominem
attack, non sequitur and a strawman all in one. I'm betting that
yout post is entirely content free.

Sure you'd probably litigate against the careless driver, but if you had
any sense at all you'd litigate against the ****ers who made coffee so
hot that an incidient beyond your control boiled your ********.


SPeak for yourself! I would no longer litigate against the driver, nor
Mackie-D's as long as I was made whole. Litigation is for losers. It
makes everyone poorer, other than the lawyers.

You must be the most tolerant driver I know. Most people take some
kind of action when a collision occurs. Somehow I doubt you get out
of your car and shake hands with them, then pay full whack for the
repairs out of your own pocket.

Superficially that case did sound stupid, but when the details did
actually emerge it appears McDs were being practically homicidal.


I would expect this attitude from a slave to the state. Here in the US
some of us ae trying to get people stand on their own feet.

I don't really know why you bothered making a pretence of posting a
resopnse as you didn't tackle the argument I presented at all. The
personal attacks you presented in place of any kind of rational
argument were lame at best. I've heard better come from the lips of
a 5 year old.


Cheers,
Rupert

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 09:17:11 +0100, Rupert Pigott wrote:

keith wrote:
On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 10:54:44 +0100, Rupert Pigott wrote:

[SNIP]

Think about this : You've got your cup of superheated McD's coffee


You really do like to *lie*, don't you Rupert. You know as well as I do

It's called humour. I figure you're attacking it because you actually
have no valid response to the core argument in this post.

I guess you call a lie "humor", after you're caught. There was no humor
there, not even quotation marks around "superheated".

that the coffee in question was in *no* way "superheated" (a term that
is very well defined). 180F does not fit *any* definiton of
"superheated". Hot, sure, but that's what the customer (*me*) demands.


in one hand and you are getting into your car. Just as you sit down and
you are carefully moving your superheated

^^^^^^^^^^^-- there's that lie again.

Oh blimey ! Humour isn't allowed by decree of Keith.

....another lie.

cup of coffee to a place well
away from your genitals some mother****er rear ends your parked car and
you end up with this unnecessarily hot cup of coffee in your crotch
anyways.


...and according to everythign you've written in the past six months,
"it's George Bush's fault", eh?

Jeez, that *is* desperate. You managed to combine a an ad hominem
attack, non sequitur and a strawman all in one. I'm betting that yout
post is entirely content free.

Nope, just bringing up the recent posting history as evidence of a
looser-leftie.

Sure you'd probably litigate against the careless driver, but if you
had any sense at all you'd litigate against the ****ers who made coffee
so hot that an incidient beyond your control boiled your ********.


SPeak for yourself! I would no longer litigate against the driver, nor
Mackie-D's as long as I was made whole. Litigation is for losers. It
makes everyone poorer, other than the lawyers.

You must be the most tolerant driver I know. Most people take some kind
of action when a collision occurs. Somehow I doubt you get out of your
car and shake hands with them, then pay full whack for the repairs out
of your own pocket.

Nope, I do what all reasonable people do. Swap insurance cards and move
on. ...no reason for road-rage. ...no reason to call in the
ambulance-chasers.

Superficially that case did sound stupid, but when the details did
actually emerge it appears McDs were being practically homicidal.


I would expect this attitude from a slave to the state. Here in the US
some of us ae trying to get people stand on their own feet.

I don't really know why you bothered making a pretence of posting a
resopnse as you didn't tackle the argument I presented at all. The
personal attacks you presented in place of any kind of rational argument
were lame at best. I've heard better come from the lips of a 5 year old.

My, you lefty-loosers do like to lie.

--
Keith