Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 4/16/2015 3:05 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Thursday, April 16, 2015 at 2:23:00 PM UTC-4, dadiOH wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:


Here we go again with the same ridiculous assertion that consumers
are being deceived by smaller packages. I'll make this easy for you.

Here's is the definition of "deceive". Do us all a favor and explain
to us how a clearly marking a container with the weight of the
contents and the price fits this definition.

de·ceive
d?'sev/
verb

- (of a thing) give a mistaken impression.

That doesn't fit, how? A slightly smaller container certainly gives a
mistaken impression.

Wait...in your response to Mike you said "I wouldn't exactly call it
"deception"" and "Deception, no; sneaky, you bet".

Are you now saying "Deception, yes" because you feel it fits that
definition?

Changing your mind is OK. :-) I'm just trying trying to make sure I
know where you stand on this issue. I may not agree with you, but I
can't say that until I know which side you're on. ;-)


We can argue definitions for weeks. The intent is to make more money
and have the customer not notice. Sleazy at least, IMO, the intention
is to deceive. Your option to agree or not.
The want the customer to think it is business as usual.

That's a very good way of putting it. Customer has her or his guard
down, get's home, starts taxes as usual, and notices Turbo Tax Deluxe no
longer handles a Schedule D, etc., without an "upgrade". I regard it as
fraudulent (but I'm not a lawyer...)