娛樂滿紛 26FUN - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: 有野睇! 你地幫襯過咁樣計數既茶餐廳未? [樂+] [打印本頁]

作者: a12 時間: 2005-5-18 11:40 PM 標題: 有野睇! 你地幫襯過咁樣計數既茶餐廳未? [樂+]

http://kakalok.why.to/. Y5 d. { f9 a8 j ]4 r6 y5 S9 ?

m8 U& r4 |8 k7 K5 O) d& L6 S/ ^

[ Last edited by 樂壇渣Fit人 on 2005-5-25 at 11:47 PM ]

作者: 張仔 時間: 2005-5-19 12:04 AM

我食過佢喇, 不過我又冇留意呢樣野呀

作者: d228216 時間: 2005-5-19 12:10 AM

食茶餐為E肚莫生氣! 佢地出得依D 糞橋, 代表E間餐廳好怏玩完

作者: 老鬼X 時間: 2005-5-19 12:11 AM

佢自己唔問清楚+ T6 c, e5 |% ?5 A( f
個伙記寫價單係19+107 u, o& h8 X" s8 m: J
檔野就一定有問題( |) Y( p9 ~* P" S4 V5 u2 h
但係自己都要有少少責任

作者: Christy~呀華 時間: 2005-5-19 12:36 AM

Originally posted by 老鬼X at 2005-5-19 12:11 AM:
8 F. r) v0 ^. I6 y佢自己唔問清楚& T/ h2 {" w% @4 p5 d: T5 |
個伙記寫價單係19+10
6 c# K0 F5 S! a檔野就一定有問題/ D B' q3 N6 V% _
但係自己都要有少少責任

% Y5 M# I( [7 Z ^/ T
大家都有責任既,

: M" f7 B, B m% T! x* G
餐廳一定有問題架啦,

3 D7 _9 C! u7 b( A+ Q! u- b
而食野都係要睇清楚好D!

作者: mp3 時間: 2005-5-19 02:12 AM

我去過呢間野到食la~5 ]6 ^3 P7 |8 E1 V
我就冇見過呢d問題~呢間野都ok嫁~

作者: Vincent銘 時間: 2005-5-19 02:24 AM

但人地有圖為證喎.....

究竟信邊邊好呢.....
5 V; a- {( b/ Y1 C' r
XD 睇黎要搵人去試下........

作者: ktv123 時間: 2005-5-19 07:45 AM

Quote: 5 i- ~- O& ?8 b$ t. g6 o
Originally posted by 老鬼X at 2005-5-19 12:11 AM:
佢自己唔問清楚0 Q+ x7 }, U) U% C8 D, N
個伙記寫價單係19+103 o7 `( R" g/ I; z9 L% @
檔野就一定有問題+ Q: ^+ ?$ J0 `
但係自己都要有少少責任

}, x3 u* c' u

Originally posted by Christy~呀華 at 2005-5-19 12:36 AM:8 j( M+ r/ J* V+ A
7 R* `- W/ Z+ Z
大家都有責任既,3 ^, S5 v0 ?% a: v4 m
餐廳一定有問題架啦,3 \* u% g$ K8 |: R; T! `
而食野都係要睇清楚好D!

6 \- B; \) ]7 m0 H+ n

The above are typical irresponsible uneducated comments and destructive attitude which mislead everybody. The key problem here is the dishonest act of the shop which it has purposely set up a trap by using a misleading ad to mislead customers in order to make extra profit. Is the case straight forward and simple. This act is sinful, unlawful, and disguesting. Sometimes it is amazing to see how people will think that the complainant has to share responsibility. By applying this distorted theory, it is the same rediculous way that people think those women who got raped should bear certain degree of responsibility because they are sexy or something. Because "I am" sexy or stupid, it DOES NOT WARRANT anybody to take advantage of me. This pathetic theory is totally absurd, laughable, ludicrous, nonsensical, uncivilised, irresponsible, . . .

P.S. Regarding yelling at someone with abusive language, it is of course against the law as a charge of "2nd or 3rd degree verbal assault" or "disturbing the puble peace". The policeman should work a little bit harder in that regard. Because of their ignorance in law, our society is less peaceful, but what can we say when they only have six months training before dispatching out to patrol.

作者: mp3 時間: 2005-5-19 04:38 PM

今日行過都仲見到個牌係度~* f: @% z- h* [
講真,我覺得係佢自己唔問清楚,我平時去開都冇d o甘o既事' l; g, U$ V% s6 M+ G' L
服務態度都唔錯~但係後尾佢講果d話有人講粗口我就唔知la~~
p.s果度都幾多金毛飛幫襯

作者: vivienna 時間: 2005-5-19 04:46 PM

有誤導成份就已經犯法啦。。。。

作者: 良友 時間: 2005-5-19 05:11 PM

多麼九西啊!

作者: coke123 時間: 2005-5-19 08:11 PM

咁賤!?

作者: 樂壇渣Fit人 時間: 2005-5-25 11:49 PM

請問有冇人可以重post個張單呀" t/ m$ a0 N4 H: c+ T/ [) C* g
個weblink死左呀 >_<"

歡迎光臨娛樂滿紛 26FUN (http://26fun.com/bbs7/)