Damnit, she's only 18 months old, she's gonna touch that hot plate no matter what you say!

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by echo6160

... You're not a pleasant person are you? It's like you're arguing some other point entirely - and getting all nasty about it.

You dropped in with insults and have tried to argue things I haven't said. Since you continue to do this here I'll leave you to argue with yourself.

As for humor, I doubt many people consider being called a a jizz covered harlot amusing.

I hope you fall down the stairs and end up ass - over - head with a case of horrendous explosive diarrhoea. Bring the pain - then choke on the foetid faecal rain!

This is against the rules - I suggest you don't do it again.

It's the pit...if you can't have fun calling each other ridiculous names and using expletives - then why are we even here and not in Great Debates?

This thread was moved here by the mods because of people like you.

[kambuckta]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

This thread was moved here by the mods because of people like you.

The thread was moved here by the mods because you're a drooling idiot actually.

[Cat Whisperer]

Now now, children - you can ALL be drooling idiots.

[Missy2U]

Originally Posted by Cat Whisperer

Now now, children - you can ALL be drooling idiots.

CW, that gave me my first HUGE laugh of the day. Thanks!!

[Doug K.]

I like to go to Erik's Restaurant near the Paris opera house. Families with small children are seated under the grand chandelier.

[BottledBlondJeanie]

Here's an interesting twist on the hot plate issue. Warning, it's a pdf http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...WNDMN4wk3S9d4A

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by BottledBlondJeanie

Here's an interesting twist on the hot plate issue. Warning, it's a pdf http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...WNDMN4wk3S9d4A

This case referenced in yours is more pertinent. It specifically points out that a fajita skillet is an 'open and obvious danger', meaning that it is avoidable, and not a 'risk of severe harm'.

[BottledBlondJeanie]

Hell, sorry, that is the case I meant to link to. Thanks!

[Cheesesteak]

Interesting, here are a couple of quotes

In general, a premises possessor owes a duty to an invitee to exercise reasonable
care to protect the invitee from an unreasonable risk of harm caused by a
dangerous condition on the land. However, this duty does not generally
encompass removal of open and obvious dangers . . . .


A danger is open and obvious when the danger is known to the invitee or
is so obvious that the invitee might reasonably be expected to discover it

I think the question here is... Who is the invitee? If the toddler is considered the invitee*, then a sizzling hot platter, a cup of boiling water, or a loaded pistol would not be considered an open and obvious danger.


*Is there any reason the toddler would not be considered an invitee? He's clearly not a trespasser. Does the fact that he has a protector in tow remove the property owner's duty?

[Cat Whisperer]

Originally Posted by Missy2U

CW, that gave me my first HUGE laugh of the day. Thanks!!

You're welcome!

While we're at it, we should probably ban all food from restaurants - choking hazard, you know.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Doug K.

I like to go to Erik's Restaurant near the Paris opera house. Families with small children are seated under the grand chandelier.

Double points for the Phantom reference - I love that one.

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak

Interesting, here are a couple of quotes
I think the question here is... Who is the invitee? If the toddler is considered the invitee*, then a sizzling hot platter, a cup of boiling water, or a loaded pistol would not be considered an open and obvious danger.

*Is there any reason the toddler would not be considered an invitee? He's clearly not a trespasser. Does the fact that he has a protector in tow remove the property owner's duty?

I think the toddler isn't the invitee because they didn't choose to go to the restaurant nor are they paying, so that seems to leave it to just the parents. What is also a grey area - "protect the invitee from an unreasonable risk of harm caused by a dangerous condition". What is "unreasonable risk"? Is it unreasonable to expect parents to keep an eye on their kids when food comes to the table? Is it reasonable to expect a server to know that a space on the table has been cleared because the toddler is grabby? Is a hot plate considered to be dangerous?

This one too - "A danger is open and obvious when the danger is known to the invitee or is so obvious that the invitee might reasonably be expected to discover it". Shouldn't it be obvious to the parent that hot plates are likely to show up?

I think these are the core questions. Some parents seem to think that the restaurant assumes all responsibility for keeping hot plates away from any children they bring, whereas other parents think it is their responsibility to keep an eye out for any dangers that might threaten their kids. Those parents seem to also be more aware that servers are humans and can make mistakes as to plate placement, and that the servers may have something else on their minds other than the special snowflake.

This whole thing of expecting servers to keep potentially harmful things away from other peoples' children seems to be the same thing as parents who let their kids play in the street and then can't understand why one of them got hit by a car.

[bengangmo]

Looking at some of the posts in this thread I have to wonder how people would deal around here.

We semi regularly eat at places that serve the food over open braiziers - one that even has real live burning charcoal to keep the soup hot - right there at the table.

We eat there with a 20 month old - sometimes in a high chair, sometimes not. To date, we have managed to get through dining without getting her burnt to a crisp.

Of course, I won't mention the 7 year old who thought it was a good idea to grab the fry pan while we were cooking pancakes together the other day...

[Cheesesteak]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

I think the toddler isn't the invitee because they didn't choose to go to the restaurant nor are they paying, so that seems to leave it to just the parents.

Does this apply to adults too? An adult who did not choose the restaurant and is not paying for the meal is not an invitee, thus the property owner has no duty regarding their safety?

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak

Does this apply to adults too? An adult who did not choose the restaurant and is not paying for the meal is not an invitee, thus the property owner has no duty regarding their safety?

Adults always enter restaurants by choice unless they're being kidnapped. It's not about which restaurant you go to, or who pays the bill. It's about voluntary actions.

[MsWhatsit]

Originally Posted by bengangmo

Looking at some of the posts in this thread I have to wonder how people would deal around here.

We semi regularly eat at places that serve the food over open braiziers - one that even has real live burning charcoal to keep the soup hot - right there at the table.

We eat there with a 20 month old - sometimes in a high chair, sometimes not. To date, we have managed to get through dining without getting her burnt to a crisp.

Of course, I won't mention the 7 year old who thought it was a good idea to grab the fry pan while we were cooking pancakes together the other day...

Unless the waiter unexpectedly dropped a flaming brazier in front of your kid in the middle of dinner, I'm not sure I see the relevance to the situation the rest of us are discussing.

Off-topic anecdote: I was at a pizza place with friends once when their 5-year-old abruptly decided to get a closer look at one of the candles on the table. Her hair promptly caught fire. Luckily quick action by her mom (thumping the flame out with a good whack) prevented injury. This is also totally not relevant to the situation being discussed, but "burnt to a crisp" made me think of it, and it's a good story.

[Cheesesteak]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

Adults always enter restaurants by choice unless they're being kidnapped. It's not about which restaurant you go to, or who pays the bill. It's about voluntary actions.

Tough luck for kidnap victims, eh? Not only are they kidnapped, but they can't even sue a restaurant for pouring a pot of hot coffee in their lap.

Actually, I'm thinking the concept of invitee has to do with the property owner inviting the person on the premises, vs. that person entering uninvited. Hence the root "invite". If children are barred from the premises, then the restaurant has no duty to make their establishment safe for children. If children are allowed to enter and eat meals, the duty exists.

[stegon66]

I'd rather have dealt with a couple with children than some cheap ass, "I got a coupon!!", "Don't forget my senior/student/club member discount!", "Are we in time for the early bird?" , penny pinching bs. Kids can be a hassle, so can anyone else, but with much less excuse. In the end it is irrelevant, as a server, it is your job to try to keep your customers happy. Avoiding what you know is a potential danger is pretty common sense. Kind of like not putting a knife in children's place settings.

Heh, many's the time I've sat an oldster who then slaps a coupon down on the table like he's won the fuckin' lottery. Harmless I know, but annoying!

As for the hot plate issue, I'm not a server but I've delivered plenty of food and I always warn people (even if they don't have small children with them) of hot plates. This is the least servers can do and management should instruct them to do so. After that it's on the parents. (Fortunately most parents will take the kids' plate themselves.)

[BottledBlondJeanie]

I apologize for being sloppy, but here's a general summary of child as invitee. But, I swear I have seen state laws where the parent's presence transfers any duty beyond ordinary landowner care to a non-minor to the parent. Under the circumstances we're talking about here, the child will never be a tresspasser.

http://premisesliability.uslegal.com...dren/invitees/

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak

Does this apply to adults too? An adult who did not choose the restaurant and is not paying for the meal is not an invitee, thus the property owner has no duty regarding their safety?

An adult always has a choice, but a child doesn't. I just don't think you can apply that law to an accompanied child.

[Dunkelheit]

Originally Posted by Omar Little

Yep I've even said "put it over here" to be ignored and have it placed in front of my child.

A lot of people in this thread seem to be missing or ignoring this point, which was made very early on in the thread, so there's no excuse available for having not read it. The OP HAS indicated a safer place for the hot plates/tippy water glasses/spicy foods etc to be placed, and the wait staff has ignored this request. That alone is bad customer service, and has nothing to do with anyone wanting them to "babysit" the child.

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Jeneva

A lot of people in this thread seem to be missing or ignoring this point, which was made very early on in the thread, so there's no excuse available for having not read it. The OP HAS indicated a safer place for the hot plates/tippy water glasses/spicy foods etc to be placed, and the wait staff has ignored this request. That alone is bad customer service, and has nothing to do with anyone wanting them to "babysit" the child.

The OP didn't specify that happened in the case described in the OP. He's not complaining about being ignored. The whole point of this train running off the rails in crazy town is expectation of performance without a specific request.

[Cheesesteak]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

An adult always has a choice, but a child doesn't.

So, if I choose of my own free will to enter a restaurant, the restaurant has a duty regarding my safety.

If I enter the restaurant without being given a choice in the matter, the restaurant has no duty towards me anymore.

Doesn't that seem rather backwards to you*? The adult who freely enters the restaurant is afforded a positive duty from the restaurant to ensure his safety. The child, who had no choice, and little personal capability to defend himself has no such legal protection.


*That's a generic you, I'm sure it makes perfect sense to non-generic you, since it results in children getting the shaft.

[TriPolar]

Originally Posted by Cheesesteak

So, if I choose of my own free will to enter a restaurant, the restaurant has a duty regarding my safety.

If I enter the restaurant without being given a choice in the matter, the restaurant has no duty towards me anymore.

Doesn't that seem rather backwards to you*? The adult who freely enters the restaurant is afforded a positive duty from the restaurant to ensure his safety. The child, who had no choice, and little personal capability to defend himself has no such legal protection.


*That's a generic you, I'm sure it makes perfect sense to non-generic you, since it results in children getting the shaft.

It has nothing to do with the scenario you describe. It's about the parent being responsible instead of the child. Whether the parent (themself, or as proxy for the child) or the restaurant is responsible is a different question. It just won't be the child.

[Uber_the_Goober]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

You dropped in with insults and have tried to argue things I haven't said. Since you continue to do this here I'll leave you to argue with yourself.

As for humor, I doubt many people consider being called a a jizz covered harlot amusing.



This is against the rules - I suggest you don't do it again.



This thread was moved here by the mods because of people like you.

Again - in another, easier to understand choice of words - get over yourself and have a little fun.

If what I've said is against the rules, then the mods will step in and discipline me, and I'll deal with that. No need to chide me in their stead. Don't they have a title for that...junior something or other?

And this was moved here by the mods for whatever reason they gave when they moved it (I frankly don't care) - I simply noticed it's place in the pit and decided to word my posts accordingly.

You ballsoccer! That's right...think about it...sounds bad - but it's not! I doubt even curlcoat could get butthurt over that one.

[Dunkelheit]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

The OP didn't specify that happened in the case described in the OP. He's not complaining about being ignored. The whole point of this train running off the rails in crazy town is expectation of performance without a specific request.

I am responding to the many, many posts in this thread that say "Just ask the waitperson to put the dish down in a different spot", as if the OP had not already, very early on, said that they had done so and were ignored.

[Uber_the_Goober]

Originally Posted by Jeneva

I am responding to the many, many posts in this thread that say "Just ask the waitperson to put the dish down in a different spot", as if the OP had not already, very early on, said that they had done so and were ignored.

Don't let the facts get in the way of a good ol' fashioned uproar!

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Jeneva

I am responding to the many, many posts in this thread that say "Just ask the waitperson to put the dish down in a different spot", as if the OP had not already, very early on, said that they had done so and were ignored.

Can you point out a post where the OP said they asked that a dish be put in a different or specific spot? I don't remember anything about that, but I really don't want to have to go back thru this thread...

echo6160, you are an unbelievable idiot, and lord knows I've met plenty of them on this board.

[Omar Little]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Can you point out a post where the OP said they asked that a dish be put in a different or specific spot? I don't remember anything about that, but I really don't want to have to go back thru this thread...

See post #370 above where they point to post #21.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Omar Little

See post #370 above where they point to post #21.

OK, lost that in this whole thing - I'd even forgotten that you were the OP. I agree that no server should ignore you when you ask something be put someplace different before she places it on the table. Tho I certainly would assume she was just distracted/didn't hear before jumping to negatives.

Zeriel, Hubby and I went to the House of Blues in Downtown Disney (what a zoo) and 3-4 different restaurants in casinos in Laughlin in the past week. Did not see one high chair. OTOH, despite HoB being in/near Disney, none of those places were really kid friendly.

[Zeriel]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Zeriel, Hubby and I went to the House of Blues in Downtown Disney (what a zoo) and 3-4 different restaurants in casinos in Laughlin in the past week. Did not see one high chair. OTOH, despite HoB being in/near Disney, none of those places were really kid friendly.

Can't say I'm surprised at the casinos. I'm moderately surprised at House of Blues, though.

Actually, last time I was at Mohegan Sun, they had high chairs at the upscale BBQ place. Maybe I'll check the steakhouse next time.

[Moonlitherial]

I thought of this thread Saturday night. We attended a good friends wedding and their very small reception was held at Ruth's Chris steakhouse. Their big gimmick is that they bake butter onto the plates before adding your steak and the plates are billed as being 600 degrees.

Of the 10 people attending 3 touched the plates to "see if it was really that hot" so I'm no longer blaming the toddler for doing the same

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Zeriel

Can't say I'm surprised at the casinos. I'm moderately surprised at House of Blues, though.

Really? That place was a screaming zoo, I can't imagine anyone taking a child in there.

[Zeriel]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Really? That place was a screaming zoo, I can't imagine anyone taking a child in there.

I tend to mostly go to House of Blues Atlantic City in the offseason, it's never that terribly crazy. Haven't been there since the kid was born though.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Zeriel

I tend to mostly go to House of Blues Atlantic City in the offseason, it's never that terribly crazy. Haven't been there since the kid was born though.

Ah. I had never been there before, but this one was packed and very noisy. On a Thursday night, before tourist season has really started. I shudder to think what it is like on a weekend in the summer!

[Zeriel]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Ah. I had never been there before, but this one was packed and very noisy. On a Thursday night, before tourist season has really started. I shudder to think what it is like on a weekend in the summer!

Atlantic City offseason, being that it's on the Jersey coast in winter, is ACTUALLY an off season. Disney only has "slightly less crowded because some kids are in school" season.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Zeriel

Atlantic City offseason, being that it's on the Jersey coast in winter, is ACTUALLY an off season. Disney only has "slightly less crowded because some kids are in school" season.

Sigh, it didn't used to be that way. Used to be we'd see an obvious difference in traffic, more out of state plates, things like that. But apparently more folks are taking kids out of school, or Disney has become more of a destination for non-parents. "Summer hours" seem to start earlier every year. Just makes it harder to try to figure out how to get around on the freeways!

[pikey pete]

Originally Posted by Omar Little

Seems like 2 out of 3 servers in restaurants I go to have no concept of what small children will or will not do. In fairness to them, the most likely don't have kids of their own and are probably clueless, but if a good portion of your customers come in with small kids, you probably should learn or they won't want to come back.

My youngest is about to be 18 months. She feeds herself but she doesn't really understand if you say "hot plate" that she shouldn't touch it because she might burn herself. My wife and I are pretty good at intercepting these things and moving them out of her reach when they reach the table, but every once in a while, she's too damn fast and the waiter/waitress is not thinking when setting something extremely hot down on the table within her reach, all the time saying "this plate is extremely hot!" Well, no shit Sherlock. You probably shouldn't be sitting it down near the toddler.

When we order water all around, again, 1 out of 5 times the server is going to bring a standard glass filled with ice water and set it down directly in front of her. WTF are you thinking?

So far, no extreme damage has been done, but it does give me pause with regard to the critical thinking skills of some of our youth.

wow, I remember when I was young, and waited tables, we were nowhere that foolish. hell, I cringed when parents asked for crackers for their 18 month old. 75% of the time the kid didn't eat the crackers, they would just crush them and distribute them liberally about their general area. If you wanted a good tip, you learned kids quick. rules were: lots of napkins, always take straws, cups with spill resistant lids, plenty of ketchup.