The irrational and the not-so-irrational annoyance thread part two...

People who say 'no' to you when you are having a discussion only then to agree with what you have said - they seem to think by repackaging your argument as their own and saying 'no' loudly (should that be 'NO' ?) just as you finish means that they have had the idea and are correct.

It's just not rational - all they needed to have said is 'yes'.
 
Special offers with incorrect use of the term 'free'.

E.g. "special offer - blu-ray player for only £100 - includes free cable". er, how is the cable free? The deal is, I give you £100, and you give me a blu-ray player and a cable. You might as well say it's a £100 cable with a free blu-ray player.
 
I get particularly annoyed when I have to explain myself because someone has jumped to the wrong conclusion.
My options are to leave the person believing something false, or defending myself by explanation.

The feeling of being forced to explain myself because of someone else's incompetence drives me nuts inside...
 
In my performance review we get to decide what grade we think we deserve, and the manager decides one too - and then we're suppose to discuss.

This angers me, because if I think I deserve a higher grade than given - I have to explain why. If they don't already know now why I might deserve a higher grade then they haven't got enough visibility to assess my performance in the first place!

So I just opt for the standard 'effective performance' because I think the whole thing is a joke, and I'm not going to argue to the toss.
 
News readers who insist on pronouncing the name Nicolas Sarkozy as if they are auditioning for a part in 'Allo 'Allo!

edit: and thanks for truncating part one at 1000 posts.
 
Back
Top