They are responding to a post specifically talking about self checkouts and the loophole that exists solely with them…
How does this need to be explained? Lmfao.
At the self checkout, the cost to return all the merchandise to the shelves costs money, to let them go through the the till is profit instead of a loss.
I was literally taking what the person I responded to a little further and this tripped you guys up? Fucking hell this place is weird to have conversations on.
This is hilarious, because the loophole only applies and exists on the self checkouts. So I’m actually on topic, while you actually missed the key detail to this topic. Did you not read the article before commenting? Because this seems to be the issue while discussion online, intelligence is a moot factor, but people like to try and bring it up when they think they know something somebody doesn’t. Which isn’t the case here… quite the opposite, I’m talking about what the article as discussion, why aren’t you?
Funny how when people try to speak out and make fun of someone, it’s usually them that missed the point. Perfect example right here.
This loophole that this entire article was talking about was about self check outs, just like the person I originally responded to. I don’t know why the person who responded to me claims need your card to use them, that’s why this article was made, because you don’t need to and you can make purchases without your card there…. That’s what the article was about… did you even read it…?
But sure, you’re the intelligent one for missing that…? You sure about that…? Lmfao. The context is self checkout, I’m sorry you missed this and are now trying to insult people for having a conversation, that went right over your head, because yo failed to read the idle and comprehend what the issue is? Nice one buddy lol.
Then what stops anyone from just never getting a membership?
I’m talking specifically about the self checkout loophole that only came when they made self checkouts….?
Was that not obvious from responding to someone taking about that same thing?
The person you responded to does not mention self checkouts fyi
They are responding to a post specifically talking about self checkouts and the loophole that exists solely with them…
How does this need to be explained? Lmfao.
At the self checkout, the cost to return all the merchandise to the shelves costs money, to let them go through the the till is profit instead of a loss.
I was literally taking what the person I responded to a little further and this tripped you guys up? Fucking hell this place is weird to have conversations on.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
This is hilarious, because the loophole only applies and exists on the self checkouts. So I’m actually on topic, while you actually missed the key detail to this topic. Did you not read the article before commenting? Because this seems to be the issue while discussion online, intelligence is a moot factor, but people like to try and bring it up when they think they know something somebody doesn’t. Which isn’t the case here… quite the opposite, I’m talking about what the article as discussion, why aren’t you?
Funny how when people try to speak out and make fun of someone, it’s usually them that missed the point. Perfect example right here.
This loophole that this entire article was talking about was about self check outs, just like the person I originally responded to. I don’t know why the person who responded to me claims need your card to use them, that’s why this article was made, because you don’t need to and you can make purchases without your card there…. That’s what the article was about… did you even read it…?
But sure, you’re the intelligent one for missing that…? You sure about that…? Lmfao. The context is self checkout, I’m sorry you missed this and are now trying to insult people for having a conversation, that went right over your head, because yo failed to read the idle and comprehend what the issue is? Nice one buddy lol.
What’s the loophole? You still have to scan your membership card in self checkout. Or is it using someone else?