Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
apple sent me an extra 17 mbp. What should i do?
- Thread starter zoeconner
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You were entirely within your rights to post to this thread, old or not. My advice is to pay no attention whatever to the judgmental twit who criticized those of us who have posted to this thread recently. The guy who leveled the criticism here is not a moderator and until and unless he becomes one, the decision whether to post here is ours not his.
If and when you become a moderator, I will certainly do whatever you suggest about the topicality of posts. Until and unless that happens, though, it's still up to me. I posted because I thought then and still think now that the recent posts breathed some topicality into the thread. I might add that unsolicited advice about the topicality of the posts of others seems to me to be bad form. Anyway, if you will avoid giving me any more such advice, I will do the same for you.
You can do whatever you like and I'll do whatever I like. It's an advice on information perseverance.
The rules encourage you to post, but some threads are too big to carry any decent discussion in, so mods wasteland them. So, to prevent useful information from being thrown out, we sorta restrict discussion of some not so commonly discussed topics when the thread gets too big.
This thread is example of this. It is always preferred you do a entire new thread if a case like this happens.
That "judgmental twit" happens to have been here longer than you to know when somethings are best laid low. Move along and stop beating ANOTHER dead horse.
Except for any children who we may be wanting to grow up as good, contributing, members of society.....
1) If the mods had thought this thread was too long, it would have been binned. It's not, ergo one can't assume it's too long.
2) Your comment "We sorta restrict discussion..." implies that you have a moderating role.... you must have left your title at the cleaners this morning.
3) Please show me the spot in the rules where "It is always preferred ..." is specified. The poster who brought this thread back to life made a judgement call, based on the absence of "When a thread is 334.5 days to 567.33 days since the last posting, and has between 247 and 768 posts to it, then - if it's tuesday and there have been no product announcements in the past 13 days that involve both a G5 CPUand Firewire 1600, it may be better to start a new thread.
4) If you don't like the judgement call, then who are you to question it? See #1 and #2 above. You don't like it .... don't read it. Obviously other people were enjoying it. I would like to know the outcome of the original issue as well.
5) I've posted consecutively.
6) Check my join date. Ironic, eh?
MRoogle. Unless you shouldn't MRoogle. To figure out if you should MRoogle or just post a new thread, MRoogle "should I Mroogle or post a new thread?"
Don't just post a thread asking when you should MRoogle and when you should just post a new thread. Or at least don't post the thread until you MRoogle first, to find out if anyone else ever posted the question. Of course, if they did, but it's old...
I'm exhausted.
Don't just post a thread asking when you should MRoogle and when you should just post a new thread. Or at least don't post the thread until you MRoogle first, to find out if anyone else ever posted the question. Of course, if they did, but it's old...
I'm exhausted.
1. So far it's not the case, and I want it not being the case...
2. We as a community... is that so hard to understand?
3. Well, I can link you to threads that have been closed because of it, but well, with MRoogle you can manage that. It is common practice.
4. The original issue was resolved looong ago. OP most likely ended up keeping it as the Apple rep said "he isn't going out of his way" to get it back, but that it had been noted. No other post has been made by OP after that, implying it was his to keep.
5. So do I...
6. Yes it is, yet your post count is somewhat low...
1. So far it's not the case, and I want it not being the case...
2. We as a community... is that so hard to understand?
3. Well, I can link you to threads that have been closed because of it, but well, with MRoogle you can manage that. It is common practice.
4. The original issue was resolved looong ago. OP most likely ended up keeping it as the Apple rep said "he isn't going out of his way" to get it back, but that it had been noted. No other post has been made by OP after that, implying it was his to keep.
5. So do I...
6. Yes it is, yet your post count is somewhat low...
1) Since the post that started this whole new thread was asking specifically how the earlier issue was resolved, it seems logical to me that they add their new question there. If the original OP, or any one of the many people who contributed to the thread, are still subscribed to the thread they will see the new question. They were interested in how the issue was resolved the 1st time - they may have an interest in the sequel version.
2) We, as a community, have assigned sheriff duties to specific individuals, who get to wear the badge. Those of us without the badges have no authority.
Although, I do believe that individuals with more experience here can, and sometimes should, point out - diplomatically, softly, and with lots of 'imho's and 'I believe's - when a new member is constantly pushing the boundaries of acceptable conduct. I occasionally had that help back when I was new. Since tagging a question specific to an old thread is, imho, in the grey area of acceptable I think we non-sheriffs should have just ignored it. I believe we can do more harm by making MR a rule-bound unpleasant experience, than be overlooking the occasional possible faux-pas. That may not have been a faux-pas to begin with. imho, of course.
3) That sounds like too much work for me!
Besides I might find something that undermines my position.4) Would have been interesting to hear from the original OP, though, eh?
5) And yet, no sheriffs......... hmm. They must be off picking up the new company Ferrari....
6) Well, I'm working on it. I had a bit of a hiatus there, but I'm working on it. Though it looks like you'll make 10k a little before me. I've been inspired to work harder by Dr Q.
Essentially, and with all due respect, I got my back ruffled not by 'what' you said, but 'how' you said it. A few more words to soften the message would have been appropriate, I think. It was their first post. And it was a grey area. We could have cut them some slack.
Cheers
For all we know, the Apple system is set up to send "an extra" MBP to someone randomly once a month (12 in a year is nothing compared to the millions they ship) knowing that at least 1/2 of the lucky beggers will the go around and tell the entire world what a wonderful company Apple is when Apple decides to "let them keep it." I mean really, you can't buy that kind of advertizing, eh?
eh, I mean I could see it but I mean honestly only a promotion on a forum that really is utilized by mac users anyway?
I mean I guess it's worth the slip of $3000.
Either way, I'm calling the "wahhhhh I didn't get one!" card
lol
They sent me an another one by mistake
If they don't bill you for it, you should sell it or use it. If they do bill you, then return it. You won't get anyone fired either way.
Pretty sure they have to attempt to get it back off you first if it is completely their fault and can't just take money right away!
If this happened to me I would call Apple and get them to give me a time they would call back. If they didn't I would repeat that once more. If still no action by Apple I'd keep the MBP sealed in the box for 28 days. Then I would consider it mine.
There are two requirements for a valid gift- intention and delivery. Delivery is sorted, if Apple don't respond in a reasonable period of time to rectify the mistake I think there is a pretty strong case to infer intention by conduct, or simply abandonment.