|
|
|
|
|
|
by peblos
895 days ago
|
|
|
In A, the publisher is repeating the claim without validation or substantiation that the passenger was actually kicked of and reason Y is asserted by the passenger. Basically A is hearsay In B, the publisher is stating as factual that the passenger was indeed kicked off (as opposed to getting off for any other reason) and that it was in fact for reason Y. B puts the weight of the writer/publisher behind the claim with a higher bar for verification of events Also, I think the passenger is trying to be helpful but surely he knows that he can’t manage the infotainment system as a passenger. There has to be some detail or interaction not reported here |
|
|
If he's spent a lot of time in Jamaica he may have a "well somebody needs to fix this" attitude - which can also come from having a military background.
I live in a large state (3x size of Texas) with a small population (bit over 2 million) and people here pitch in in to fix stuff fairly often (bridges out, floods, fires, push trains aside to free trapped legs).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YORxs9E2Ex0
What's missing here is the nature of the interaction, was it amiable, why did Delta staff circle round on him when he started writing a complaint, why was he complaining in any case (was it because his help was refused, or because he was complaining it was broken).
EDIT: In my earlier comment s/ASAF/USAF/ <doh>