For Diet Dr. Pepper Drinkers - win the Dr. Pepper "spiderman game" everytime.

[pshlortz]

one summer when i was a kid my family took a road trip... needless to say i was poor and folks werent gonna let me buy soda @ every gas station. So; i dids this trick, always @ a different store, and never bought a soda in 2 weeks but the first one. prolly 30 in a row.

it isn't ethically unsound if you are too young to know how to spell ethics.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: WileCoyote
something like this taken to the extreme:

sports cards/comic book stores that use sensitive digital scales to weight sealed packs of cards. often, limited edition cards use plastic or different paper stock. after seeing how accurate this system was, i decided never to buy individual packs again.

of course, it's a bit different when you go to the store and someone has swiped all the winning sodas and left you with jack squat. but it's just as unethical =P

I've heard about that A LOT from some people that frequent those sorts of places. I always wondered how they would accomplish that without opening the sealed card packs. Now I know. I don't think looking for winning soda bottles is quite the same, although it is an ethically similar "grey area".

 

[tranceport]

Originally posted by: pshlortz
one summer when i was a kid my family took a road trip... needless to say i was poor and folks werent gonna let me buy soda @ every gas station. So; i dids this trick, always @ a different store, and never bought a soda in 2 weeks but the first one. prolly 30 in a row.

it isn't ethically unsound if you are too young to know how to spell ethics.

Right on right on

 

[popeye44]

quoting above:Come on...in this day and age if looking under a cap is labeling me as unethical then by all means label me unethical. Software piracy dominates the planet and steals trillions of dollars

In response to software piracy... How can they possibly state something that they cannot prove would have been purchased has been stolen? They assume everyone would run out and buy photoshop 7 for 500+ dollars and not steal 4million copies of it. thats insane.

As for doctor pepper.. anyone remember the I'm a pepper contests? haha.. I had like 25 t shirts from that way back when. we didn't cheat then.. it was a glass bottle.
as for now...
Well, It's a printed label.. it's meant to be read and reading it b4 I buy it is something I always do. An informed buyer is much better off than an uninformed buyer thats why we are here.

Thanks for the tip, the wife likes diet dr. pepper.. I for one think Diet is Die with a T.

 

[00Zardoz00]

Hiya all.

Ethically unsound? I think not.

Personally, I think it is unethical to sell flavored sugar water for $1 with a 90% profit.

Cleverly "beating the system" by careful observation and lessening the profit margin (which won't make the company go out of business) on a product that we have all been overpaying for is just luck & a brief respite from being raked over the retail coals, so to speak.

If the company made see through labels that reveal their prize codes, then kudos to the poster!

If you choose not to exploit this freebie, that's like spotting a quarter in the sand and not picking it up, because you feel bad for the guy who lost it. But if you do pick it up, you're doing nothing wrong.

 

[HarryK]

Originally posted by: 00Zardoz00


Cleverly "beating the system" by careful observation and lessening the profit margin (which won't make the company go out of business) on a product that we have all been overpaying for is just luck & a brief respite from being raked over the retail coals, so to speak.

Exactly, 00Zardoz00 "beat the system" at Best Buy today. He "carefully observed" when the emplyees would change shifts and walked out the door with a handful of DVDs ("a product that we have all been overpaying for") It won't make the company go out of business, it's their fault that he was able to leave with the DVDs, so therefore it's not unethical.

If the company made see through labels that reveal their prize codes, then kudos to the poster!

If the company made products that can be removed from the store without being paid for, then kudos to 00Zardoz00!

If you choose not to exploit this freebie, that's like spotting a quarter in the sand and not picking it up, because you feel bad for the guy who lost it. But if you do pick it up, you're doing nothing wrong.

The ethical aspects of this have nothing to do with feeling sorry for Dr. Pepper.

Ethically unsound? I think not.

Complete moron? I think so

 

[huesmann]

Au contraire, mon frere.

This is not the same as theft of DVDs. You're still paying the same price for a bottle of Dr. P. You're just making a better-educated decision on which bottle to buy.

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: HarryK

Originally posted by: 00Zardoz00


Cleverly "beating the system" by careful observation and lessening the profit margin (which won't make the company go out of business) on a product that we have all been overpaying for is just luck & a brief respite from being raked over the retail coals, so to speak.

Exactly, 00Zardoz00 "beat the system" at Best Buy today. He "carefully observed" when the emplyees would change shifts and walked out the door with a handful of DVDs ("a product that we have all been overpaying for") It won't make the company go out of business, it's their fault that he was able to leave with the DVDs, so therefore it's not unethical.

If the company made see through labels that reveal their prize codes, then kudos to the poster!

If the company made products that can be removed from the store without being paid for, then kudos to 00Zardoz00!

If you choose not to exploit this freebie, that's like spotting a quarter in the sand and not picking it up, because you feel bad for the guy who lost it. But if you do pick it up, you're doing nothing wrong.

The ethical aspects of this have nothing to do with feeling sorry for Dr. Pepper.

Ethically unsound? I think not.

Complete moron? I think so

Hmm or not. Removing the dvds without paying for them is illegal. Attempting to decipher the printed characters on the bottom of a cap is certainly hillarious, but far from illegal.

The market saturation of this sugar water is ridulous and largely unhealthy. If there is any question of ethics, it's Coca Cola you should be questioning.

 

[HarryK]

Originally posted by: huesmann
Au contraire, mon frere.

This is not the same as theft of DVDs. You're still paying the same price for a bottle of Dr. P. You're just making a better-educated decision on which bottle to buy.

I didn't say it was the same as theft. I was challenging his bullsh1t rationalization of why it was not unethical.

He was saying that it was okay to "Cleverly "beating the system" by careful observation and lessening the profit margin (which won't make the company go out of business) on a product that we have all been overpaying for is just luck & a brief respite from being raked over the retail coals, so to speak.

I was merely giving another example of "cleverly beating the system and lessen the profit margin on a product that we all have been overpaying for"

His rationalization is exactly the same as those people who shoplift without remorse from "The Man" because "The Man makes too much money already and overcharges the consumer" "It serves big corporations right to be ripped off, and it's not like stealing from them will put them out of business"

That's why he thinks it's okay to cheat at the free Dr. Pepper contest. Because it's just sticking it to The Man.

If The Man didn't want you do cheat at the game, he wouldn't have made the labels see through. In other words, if The Man didn't want me to do something, he would've made it more difficult. The fact that I can get away with it means that it's an okay thing to do.

It's the same rationalization. You either believe it's true or you don't.
It's either a completely ethical way of "beating the system" or it's not.
He believes that it's a completely ethical course of action to stick it to The Man. I disagree.

 

[HarryK]

Originally posted by: isaacmacdonald
The market saturation of this sugar water is ridulous and largely unhealthy. If there is any question of ethics, it's Coca Cola you should be questioning.

If Coca Cola was here trying to explain why making people pay a lot of money for sugary water was a good thing for the consumer, or telling us that drinking more Coke was healthy for us, I would be questioning that. But they're not.

There are people who are here telling us that it's okay to cheat (and moreso, it's comletely ethical to cheat) because it's just being "clever". I'm only responding to those ludicrous arguments because they exist on this forum. If they didn't, I wouldn't be responding.

Like I said before, I don't care what you do with your bottle of Diet Dr. Pepper, but seeing people post completely illogical full of crap rationalizations for why it's not unethical is going to elicit a response.

Just the same as if somebody came here saying that drinking 100 gallons of Coca Cola every day would make you live forever. I'd respond to that bogus assertion as well.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: HarryK

I didn't say it was the same as theft. I was challenging his bullsh1t rationalization of why it was not unethical.

He was saying that it was okay to "Cleverly "beating the system" by careful observation and lessening the profit margin (which won't make the company go out of business) on a product that we have all been overpaying for is just luck & a brief respite from being raked over the retail coals, so to speak.

I was merely giving another example of "cleverly beating the system and lessen the profit margin on a product that we all have been overpaying for"

His rationalization is exactly the same as those people who shoplift without remorse from "The Man" because "The Man makes too much money already and overcharges the consumer" "It serves big corporations right to be ripped off, and it's not like stealing from them will put them out of business"

That's why he thinks it's okay to cheat at the free Dr. Pepper contest. Because it's just sticking it to The Man.

If The Man didn't want you do cheat at the game, he wouldn't have made the labels see through. In other words, if The Man didn't want me to do something, he would've made it more difficult. The fact that I can get away with it means that it's an okay thing to do.

It's the same rationalization. You either believe it's true or you don't.
It's either a completely ethical way of "beating the system" or it's not.
He believes that it's a completely ethical course of action to stick it to The Man. I disagree.

Your comments make me completely re-think the issue of CPU overclocking that someone else brought up. Is choosing a particular lower-cost model of CPU, with specific stepping and date codes, with the intent to run the CPU at a higher speed, equivalent to a higher-cost CPU model, also unethical? Is it at the same level of "unethical" as trying to look through the printed label of a soda bottle to be a winner in some trivial product lottery contest? I really want to know your opinion on this, I'm curious. It also causes me to think about how this could possibly be an analog for life... life is a lottery... so am I "cheating", by trying to gain an advantage, by being better-informed about things? Am I being unethical to my own self (touch of Randian philosophy here), by having the knowledge, and not using it for my own gain, thus depriving myself of an opportunity or advantage that I should rightfully have? This question is certainly different than that of outright theft.

 

[Remus]

Wow, this is an amazing response to a tiny little post. I think everyone who has weighed in on this "ethics" issue has been having some of the same thoughts that I have about the deals we get on anandtech. I got in on the iPaq deal a couple of months back when I first learned about this website and couldn't believe the amount of money I saved at OD when I price matched it to staples and the $200 in rebates rolled off the register lady's machine. I also can't forget the look of realization on her face when she handed me the receipt and new that I was scamming the company she worked for (and was loyal to) out of $200. Of course this is legal and I won't get thrown in jail because they have a pricematch guarantee! But this same sort of thing happens to us when rich politicians find loopholes in the tax laws to effectively (but legally) steal money from the rest of us who get stuck filling out our 1040's at the last minute because we've been working too much to get them done on time.
The fact that I posted this "deal" means only one thing - I'm human like everybody in this forum. But I am coming to the realization that life experience (i.e.,knowing how to spell ethics) is the tool that we are called to use when our conscience ask us "how it would feel to have something like this done to us"?
Rationalization is merely a defense mechanism against our consciences and it is very powerful. The more you use it the more logical it becomes until you believe what you are doing is O.K. It happens in all our lives and almost always gets us in trouble.
(SOUNDEFFECT Man stepping off his soap box)

 

[djheater]

Originally posted by: Remus
Wow, this is an amazing response to a tiny little post. I think everyone who has weighed in on this "ethics" issue has been having some of the same thoughts that I have about the deals we get on anandtech. I got in on the iPaq deal a couple of months back when I first learned about this website and couldn't believe the amount of money I saved at OD when I price matched it to staples and the $200 in rebates rolled off the register lady's machine. I also can't forget the look of realization on her face when she handed me the receipt and new that I was scamming the company she worked for (and was loyal to) out of $200. Of course this is legal and I won't get thrown in jail because they have a pricematch guarantee! But this same sort of thing happens to us when rich politicians find loopholes in the tax laws to effectively (but legally) steal money from the rest of us who get stuck filling out our 1040's at the last minute because we've been working too much to get them done on time.
The fact that I posted this "deal" means only one thing - I'm human like everybody in this forum. But I am coming to the realization that life experience (i.e.,knowing how to spell ethics) is the tool that we are called to use when our conscience ask us "how it would feel to have something like this done to us"?
Rationalization is merely a defense mechanism against our consciences and it is very powerful. The more you use it the more logical it becomes until you believe what you are doing is O.K. It happens in all our lives and almost always gets us in trouble.
(SOUNDEFFECT Man stepping off his soap box)

Excellent post
<--- golf claps

I think I started this and it's been the most effective hijack of my meager experience, yea me

It has been speculated that there are several effective levels of ethical ratinalization. This can be demonstrated by the question: Is it OK to steal medicine to treat a person in dire need.

The question is obviously open to interpretation, but I'm asking you all to cooperate with me and think of it simply.

On the one hand stealing is clearly wrong and there are those that would argue that because of this, no matter what the rationale it is still wrong in this case. Further the enlightened portion of this camp may say that you should steal the medicine but it is still wrong.

On the other hand some say that in this case the action is absolved of wrong and is an ethically sound action based on the rationale that human life is more important.

As I said earlier:

It's ultimately a matter of ethical flexibility and my morals are on an intense program of Hatha Yoga and tumbling exercises.

(wow, it's not often I get to quote myself. I kind of like it )

 

[pricezilla]

At many smaller mom n' pop etc stores the bottles will already be pre screened...

 

[lzpoof]

Originally posted by: HibikiRush
LaLaLand's posts usually reflect his ignorance.

Lalaland got banned on dvdtalk forums apparently for foul language and insulting other board members. This was in a post where he bragged about buying 50 or 60 of the SouthPark season 1 DVDs. I long for the day when you have to login to even view posts. Too much scum perusing boards just to order 50 of something.

 

[lzpoof]

Originally posted by: HarryK

Originally posted by: isaacmacdonald
The market saturation of this sugar water is ridulous and largely unhealthy. If there is any question of ethics, it's Coca Cola you should be questioning.

If Coca Cola was here trying to explain why making people pay a lot of money for sugary water was a good thing for the consumer, or telling us that drinking more Coke was healthy for us, I would be questioning that. But they're not.

There are people who are here telling us that it's okay to cheat (and moreso, it's comletely ethical to cheat) because it's just being "clever". I'm only responding to those ludicrous arguments because they exist on this forum. If they didn't, I wouldn't be responding.

Like I said before, I don't care what you do with your bottle of Diet Dr. Pepper, but seeing people post completely illogical full of crap rationalizations for why it's not unethical is going to elicit a response.

Just the same as if somebody came here saying that drinking 100 gallons of Coca Cola every day would make you live forever. I'd respond to that bogus assertion as well.

Well here's a thought... if you can see under the label by accident and see that the bottle you ahve is not a winner, would YOU put it back or still just buy it. And if you are someone who still just buy it, are you ethical or stupid.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: djheater

I think I started this and it's been the most effective hijack of my meager experience, yea me

It has been speculated that there are several effective levels of ethical ratinalization. This can be demonstrated by the question: Is it OK to steal medicine to treat a person in dire need.

The question is obviously open to interpretation, but I'm asking you all to cooperate with me and think of it simply.

On the one hand stealing is clearly wrong and there are those that would argue that because of this, no matter what the rationale it is still wrong in this case. Further the enlightened portion of this camp may say that you should steal the medicine but it is still wrong.

On the other hand some say that in this case the action is absolved of wrong and is an ethically sound action based on the rationale that human life is more important.

Continuing this wonderful thread hijack , that is an interesting question. I suppose if one were to use a relative ethical scale, you could weigh the cost to the each of the parties involved, if you did, and did not, chose to steal the medicine. But if you consider the moral rather than ethical issues, would that not dictate that the moral issues of saving a human life, outweigh all other ethical issues attached to the scenario?

It certainly places pharmaceutical companies that profitteer off of human suffering in a new light. It also casts an additional ethical perspective, when you consider the methods used by pharmaceutical reps, to woo doctors and pursuade them to prescribe their particular company's medications. (Dinner, expensive gifts, vacation packages, women, you name it. There's a lot more involved than just those pens at the doctor's office with drug names on them, although I'm sure that helps to drill a brand name into their subconcious quite well as well.)

Furthermore, , is it an ethically sound choice, to drink Diet Dr. Pepper, rather than the non-nutrasweet-based regular Dr. Pepper? Or should there be a higher moral imperative, to chose Dr. Pepper Red Fusion above all? Discuss.
(I feel like I am in college ethics class again.)

Edit: what about purchasing a Dr. Pepper at a convenience store, and then travelling to Burger King, to purchase a $0.99 Whopper? Is there a difference in the ethics of doing so, depending on whether you dine in, or "drive-thru"? Aren't you exploiting the fact that BK has Whoppers on sale for only $0.99, cutting into their normal profit margin, (used to pay for their workers, and keep up their standard of living for burger-flippers), and depriving them of revenue by not purchasing an overpriced waxed paper cup with plastic lid full of poorly-mixed carbonated flavored sugarwater that only partially resembles your highly-respected Dr. Pepper (R) brand soft drink? Or are you simply choosing to not allow yourself to be exploited by a rich and powerful corporate food-service conglomerate, intent on decieving you by only providing a mediocre facsimile of your favorite beverage, normally sold at extraordinarily high retail profit margins?

These are truely some serious ethical trials that modern man must go through during his daily struggle, scavenging in the urban jungle for fast food that can be both ordered and consumed, during a limited-time lunch break...

 

[huesmann]

Originally posted by: HarryK
I didn't say it was the same as theft. I was challenging his bullsh1t rationalization of why it was not unethical.

He was saying that it was okay to "Cleverly "beating the system" by careful observation and lessening the profit margin (which won't make the company go out of business) on a product that we have all been overpaying for is just luck & a brief respite from being raked over the retail coals, so to speak.

I was merely giving another example of "cleverly beating the system and lessen the profit margin on a product that we all have been overpaying for"

His rationalization is exactly the same as those people who shoplift without remorse from "The Man" because "The Man makes too much money already and overcharges the consumer" "It serves big corporations right to be ripped off, and it's not like stealing from them will put them out of business"

That's why he thinks it's okay to cheat at the free Dr. Pepper contest. Because it's just sticking it to The Man.

If The Man didn't want you do cheat at the game, he wouldn't have made the labels see through. In other words, if The Man didn't want me to do something, he would've made it more difficult. The fact that I can get away with it means that it's an okay thing to do.

It's the same rationalization. You either believe it's true or you don't.
It's either a completely ethical way of "beating the system" or it's not.
He believes that it's a completely ethical course of action to stick it to The Man. I disagree.

Wrong again. By purchasing the selected bottles he isn't even affecting the bottom line of the company. Those bottles were gonna be sold anyway, whether to him or someone else, just as all the non-winning bottles are gonna sell to someone.

 

[Miramonti]

Its amazing some people think this is unethical! When is using discretion when you buy a product unethical? Welcome to capitalism.

Perhaps printing the winning caps in a way that they can be seen before purchasing the bottles is unethical. RECALL!!