Also, I would remind folks of this polite request from the moderators.

I do want to point out that my comment about cabin fever is NOT directed at this thread alone (though it's one example). There seems to be a certain amount of crankiness, huffiness, I'm-going-to-take-my-ball-and-go-homishness out there this month which we've been discussing how to defuse for several days. Hence the kindly request, from your ever-friendly moderators, to go out and eat something and post about food...

http://new.wavlist.com/movies/336/shine-johnny.wav

Duly noted. In any case, I've said everything I can think of to say on the topic, until I hear back from Borders corporate re my complaint--at which point I'll post the gist of that conversation for our general enlightenment.

Hmm...

My post regarding libraries wasn't sui generis. A librarian friend has worked at Harold Washington for years. The stories he could tell. Of course how successfully the homeless are incorporated into the institution
in question is part and parcel of many other issues affecting the contemporary library(Chicago libraries in particular). I first noticed a schism between the massive influx of homeless and an institution ill-equipped to handle this new patronage in San Francisco @ the new downtown library in the mid-90's.

LAZ wrote:I don't mind the coffeebar squatters too much, although I think that providing more chairs elsewhere in the store would probably help this problem a lot. If you can have a quiet spot in the stacks to do your homework, you'd probably choose that over a place where you have to listen to the cappuccino machine.

What really bugs me about the bookstores is the way they have of announcing, beginning 40 minutes or so before closing, "Our store will be closing in X minutes. Please bring your final purchases to the front..." over and over again. It makes me want to drop all the books I've selected and run out of the store.

It has been many years since I worked in retail, but I can remember the store's owner, who wouldn't allow us to so much as hint to any customers left at closing time -- even by starting to vacuum -- that we weren't delighted to give them as much time as they wanted to finish shopping and give us their money. If a store wants all the customers gone by 11, then they should set the closing time at 10 or 10:30.

That's a particular pet peeve of mine at restaurants, too. The closing time they list on their door shouldn't be the time they put all the chairs on the tables and lock up -- it should be the final seating, the last time anyone can come in and order a meal. I get so annoyed at going into places 20 minutes before their signs say they close and being told they've already shut down the kitchen.

I'm not so bothered by the announcing of the store closing, as long as it isn't like every 5-10 minutes. THEN, it gets annoying. Stores less so, than restaurants. God, if restaurants did that, I'd be like 8O

As far as restaurants, I agree with you, the whole "hinting" that they are closing and want you to eat faster or drink your coffee faster so, they can start cleaning up and closing down is not very hospitable. I know it is THEIR establishment, but they have to treat the customer well or else they won't have any. There is an appropriate amount of time to let the customers eat and such past the closing time, then, there is the customers who are obviously overstaying their welcome. In that case, yeah, a little hint their way to "wrap it up" would be sufficient. But, I remember one time, when going to Starbucks. It wasn't closing time yet...probably like 10 minutes before their closing time. My husband and I were approaching the door and walking down the side of the Starbucks where there were a bunch of long windows. We see a Starbucks employee practically sprinting to the door and locking it right in front of us. Can you believe it?

Suffice to say, we were miffed and didn't visit THAT Starbucks again. We eat rather late, even with our two kids whom are both well-behaved in all the restaurants we dine at(which are a lot). So, sometimes we forego going to a restaurant if it is say, 15-20 minutes before they close. So, we do think of the restaurant employees.... I guess...

I said I'd post if I ever heard back from Borders about my complaint, and I heard from them last night (much to my surprise, after all this time). So, as promised, here's a report:

The State St. store manager called. I think his principal purpose was "pacifying an irate customer" rather than actually learning anything from me that might improve store operations, but whatever. I wasn't irate, and said so at the top of the conversation. Just wanted him to hear from one dissatisfied customer about the policy of letting non-beverage-or-food-consuming squatters take up all the tables in the cafe so that actual cafe customers have no place to sit. He acknowledged the problem, and said that it was especially bad because the students from the adjacent Art Institute dormitory seem to use the Borders cafe space as some kind of ancillary dorm. I said, "Fine, but my problem isn't with them; my problem is that you are apparently OK with this!" He said, "We're not OK with this, and are looking for ways to address the problem." I said, "OK, here's one. Put up a sign that says the cafe is for customers only. That will, in and of itself, inhibit a few squatters, and will give you a good excuse to roust the ones it doesn't inhibit." He said, "You know, we could do that," as if my idea were a stroke of genius rather than being completely obvious. It ended with him saying they do recognize this as a problem, and are looking at ways to handle it, and to look him up the next time I'm in the store and he'll buy me a free cup of coffee or something and hopefully we can actually sit down and talk. (Get it?) Anyway, it was something.

Had a much different experience at the same Borders the other day. The cafe had several available tables, and those that were occupied actually seemed to be occupied by people consuming items from the cafe, if you can believe that. (Did my phone conversation with the manager make a difference? Or was it random chance? I don't know, but it was about the same time of day as the other time.)

I sometimes preemptively "arm" myself with a plan if I think I'm going to encounter frustration. I had such a plan this time, one that I didn't have to break out and use. If I had discovered, like the last time, that the cafe's tables were all occupied by non-cafe-customers, I was going to take my coffee and sandwich and sit right down at a table with one of them anyway. Then, I'd spread out my consumables so as to take up the most possible table space. Then, when the squatter-with-the-laptop inevitably protested "Hey, this is my table," I would reply: "Oh really? I think it's my table. But tell you what. Let's let the manager settle it. Let's let him decide whether the table belongs to a paying customer or to somebody who isn't one." I was reasonably confident my plan would result in a satisfactory resolution of the problem. As I say, I didn't have to go to that plan this time, but it's not a bad one for future such situations. I'm glad I have it in my back pocket.

I spent a great deal of time in Caribou and Starbucks this summer studying for the bar, and I had a few people share tables with me when the rest of the shop was full. I'm not sure if any of them were purposefully trying to engender conflict with me when they sat down across from me (none of them seemed to take "the most possible table space"), but my response was just to scoot my stuff to the side of the table closest to me, smile at the newcomer and try not to be in her way.

riddlemay wrote: As I say, I didn't have to go to that plan this time, but it's not a bad one for future such situations. I'm glad I have it in my back pocket.

Wow. Life is really much too short to allow things like this to affect you so much. I can't imagine the benefits of actually seeking out confrontations.

Oh no, you misunderstand me. I wouldn't be purposely seeking out a confrontation. I would be simply eating my lunch at a table, even if that table were already occupied. (I suppose it sounded a little angry to be saying "spread out my consumables as much as possible," but I really wouldn't spread them out more than necessary.) Then, if the non-consuming guy I was sharing the table with was cool with that, there'd be no problem. Only if he weren't cool with that would I bring the manager into the contest. A contest I'm reasonably sure I would win. But I bet it wouldn't get that far.

Yeah, I think you'll find most of us squatters are pretty understanding when it comes to sharing our (ill-gotten?) space.