5 ms·

How was it at someone else's expense?

• geofft 10y ago
  From the images in the article, @DapperDapo tweeted out loud, tagging @JFK, asking what the right handle was to file a complaint. @JFK responded. They then proceeded to state their complaint, and @JFK mocked them. > What's @jfk Twitter page. I have complaints. < @DapperDapo we don't take complaints, only compliments. #WhyPeopleSoAngry? > Why are there 2 people working the customs line when two international flights just landed? @JFK < @DapperDapo Duh. One per flight. Next question? It's very likely (keep in mind they were probably on mobile if they were tweeting from a customs line, and @JFK has display name "JFK" and a photo of the airport as its profile picture) that they believed that they successfully reached someone at JFK, and the airport hires grumpy people. In fact, the joke is only funny if that's the case, if they were tricked into believing they talked to the airport. A very good contrast is @slack, a human named Matt Slack. His profile picture shows his face, and his display name is "Matt Slack", not "Slack". If you tag him by mistake (which happens very often!) he'll reply with some sort of joke about how he's a person and not a messaging system. Funny, classy, and not attempting to mislead. The humor is always about him very clearly not being @SlackHQ, as opposed to him being a rude version of @SlackHQ. https://twitter.com/slack/with_replies https://twitter.com/slack/with_replies
  • RubyPinch 10y ago
    But where is the notable negative impact to those two people's lives? I ain't denying that he was being a goober to them, but "at their expense" implies its at their expense I don't see how it goes further than, them getting to the next worker at the airport, saying "UGH, your PR on twitter sucks!", and then being told "maam/sir, that is not our twitter account"