Sig

Learn how to read English. I didn't speculate anything about the incident, at all. Stating that something is a possibility is not speculation on what actually happened. Your reading comprehension is very low. I guess maybe this is why you started off with your confused response to begin with. Are you really so daft to think I'd supply links to things I clearly stated were personal experiences? Done. The utter nonsense is mind-boggling.

Your comment bears no resemblance of having anything to do with my comment. Not sure why you've chosen to reply to me with a comment like this. You can't say "No." to what I have witnessed. You weren't there for those things. I was. I was making a correlation to why it is not difficult to imagine why this guy may have been assaulted simply for leaning on a car - in response to MANY people on here commenting that this sort of thing would never happen to someone for such a simple, seemingly harmless thing. That's wrong. It happens. I've repeated this to you now too many times. You don't seem to get it. I won't be replying anymore. It's a waste of time when you keep trying to make my statement into something that it wasn't. I did not say what happened in the instance of this case in the article. I don't know the details and neither do you, unless you have some other source of information outside of the article being commented about. You can speculate as much as you like. No problem. Have at it.

Where on earth did that idea come from? Maybe you are on the wrong forum? This story has nothing to do with anyone who was thought of as trying to steal a vehicle, neither in the AN summary nor the Pattaya Mail original article.

It appears that you are among the group who think it's ridiculous that a guy would get assaulted for leaning on a car. If that's the case, just say so. Say something of substance. I wrote about what I've witnessed and it leaves zero doubt in my mind that it's completely possibly that he may have been assaulted simply for leaning on a car. It wouldn't be surprising in the least. That doesn't mean that this is what happened. But the large number of posts from people seeming to think that nobody would ever assault someone for such a minor thing are oblivious to reality. Your posting comments beating around the bush with weak attempts at insult are so dull, but I suppose are somehow appropriate for dullards.

Lawfare. Pretty much the same in many countries. The US is going through a very similar thing as the Democrats try using the corrupt courts to get rid of Trump. If the Democrats in the US could pull off such a brazen move like this, they would. But they can only target Trump, not the entire party, because there's enough media complicity and enough brain dead people full of blind hatred for him. It's just another variation of what corrupt governments do when someone comes along who isn't playing the same game as them. It leads to nothing good. I sure hope Thailand isn't due for yet another coup.... but the writing seems like it's on the wall when they do this kind of insanity.

I didn't say that. I clearly said what I witnessed in my comment, which you copied.... If you're having difficulty figuring out why I mentioned what I did... it was to show that it wouldn't be surprising in the least one or more of these thugs assaulted him for leaning on a car. Many people on here were expressing doubts that it could be something so simple. They seem to have forgotten that TIT.

I suppose that would depend on how you define "valid". Where did you read anything that would bring you to such a conclusion? I highlighted a few spots for you (below) that I believe would bring anyone to the opposite conclusion. Of course, without seeing the evidence first hand, it's impossible to claim it is so, outright, but the likelihood certainly appears to be that the customer was in now way justified in making his rant/complaint, which would not make it valid in my understanding of the word. In the end, it looks like the court will end up deciding how justified it was. "The owner further disputed the claim that the manager had shouted at the customer to close the door gently. Surveillance footage, reviewed from the time the customer entered until they left, reportedly showed no such incident occurred. In a passionate message, the owner swore on sacred entities that their account was truthful and challenged the customer to present any evidence of misconduct, proposing that the CCTV footage be used in court if necessary. The owner declared their intention to pursue legal action against the individual, identified only as Miss D, without any possibility of settlement. The owner implored the public to consider that even anonymous posts can be traced and that such damaging actions should cease. They emphasised that there are many appropriate channels for complaints and that no business wants to face ruin. The restaurant is open to constructive feedback and willing to make improvements, but the owner felt compelled to defend their business against false accusations. Ultimately, the customer who posted the critical review issued a public apology, admitting that the post was made in anger and that they only wanted the staff to communicate more politely. The customer expressed willingness to apologise formally if needed and stated their intention to remain a regular patron of the restaurant. In response, the restaurant owner reiterated that monetary compensation was required and confirmed that legal action had been initiated against the customer, reported KhaoSod."

So many skeptics, with zero evidence. I've witnessed EXACTLY the situation of people (yes, plural. At least 5 that I saw, in succession over a 5 minute period) being attacked for not even leaning on a car, but even for getting too close to it! If Thais deem their protectee to be very important, they create an insane kind of authority in their feeble minds that they are allowed to do such things. As many put it, they are thugs, with the attendant IQ of such types. This also extends to official bodyguards of the elite or royalty. Best keep your distance from those thugs too, they get ancy VERY easily and freely assert physical force very quickly when it is obvious to anyone else with a brain, that it is completely unnecessary (I've seen that too, even when their protectee was inside a building more than 50 meters away, assaulting people walking by, but in the thug's estimation, too closely to the building or the entourage's coned off parked cars). The power trip many of these guys are on is truly amazing. As for soi 6... Personally, I just stay away altogether from "entertainment zones" (albeit family friendly!) at night time. Can't understand the desire to be in the vicinity of the kind of people habituating and working in those places. In Thai, a place that is อโคจร is best to avoid altogether. Never quite figured out how to get the right nuance to translate that, but it's basically along the lines of a place where people are up to no good, pretty much like the family entertainment areas of Pattaya, kinda the opposite of a temple area. lol

Hasn't it always been a family friendly destination? I could have sworn that's what I've always read from official Thai tourist info....

Anything is encouraged to happen when one refuses to maintain things.

Did you read the story? Apparently the complaints were unjustified. How can anyone, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, be blamed for having low self-esteem and being angry with unjustified complaints that can affect their business?

That's a pretty sad and telling commentary on yourself. Not that there's anything wrong with never leaving any reviews on social media, but with your own stated reason being that either way you don't see any benefit to yourself. You seem to be completely blind to the purpose of reviews. They are not intended to be for selfish purposes. Apparently you only post something if you see something in it for yourself. So, I guess this comment you left here was for your own benefit too? The only self-perceived benefit I can imagine would be some sort of ego booster. Reviews are supposed to be for the benefit of OTHERS! Positive reviews help businesses and also help people find good businesses. Negative reviews (preferably constructive criticism rather than bloviating complaints) are to help businesses know where they need improvement and to give possible customers a heads up if it hasn't been dealt with yet (which can be seen by the business's response to the review). Reviews should be a very helpful thing for all, unless they are only being made by people who only think of making the reviews to benefit themselves... which is about as useful as making comments here, only to benefit yourself. Seems like there must be something better to do with your day...?

Go ahead... just as absurd as everything else going on in the world these days. Be my guest, abandon the name your parents gave you. You obviously don't care about them anyway or you wouldn't be living your life like a complete imbecile, bringing them endless shame.

You believe that the Thai government doesn't allow Hmong ethnic people to have passports?? They are as Thai as any other ethnic group in the country last time I checked. I don't believe that level of discrimination exists as much as it used to. It's still pretty bad, but nothing like it was in recent history.

Your chart is for some sort of weekly profit scoreboard from 2023.... I got the info from the Travel and Leisure (where the article said their info was from) website regarding top international airlines for 2024 - nothing about profit....

Ignite finance and burn it all the way to the ground. That's more likely....

You'll be happy to hear that Qatar Airways made it on the list - number 5! 🙂

I can agree with you re regionally. But this article was claiming worldwide. That, I find dubious.

It actually does say that he was "cycling", thus one can deduce that he was highly likely to be on a bicycle. But I made the same mistake and this guy was correcting me. I didn't read the caption to the photo, which is the only place in the article that gives you a clue that it was not a motorcycle accident. I'm guessing you didn't read that part either. Normally photo captions aren't the only place a writer would put vital information to understand an article.... Also, the term "bike" shouldn't be used unless the context is clear as to whether it is referring to a motorcycle or a bicycle. In this case, the context was not clear, since a photo caption would not be considered as a part of the text, but only an adjunct to it.

I read two times - "bike" an ambiguous term. And since motorcycle accidents are the extremely commonly reported sorts of "bike" accidents here, I did jump to that conclusion. I didn't read the caption for the picture, since normally that isn't where vital information for understanding an article is normally put. And of course that's the only place where one could get the understanding that he was riding a bicycle. People read, you just don't give grace to people who might miss one word, especially one in an adjunct part of a piece.... I've also already been given a decently framed correction and edited my comment. No need for unreasonable comments from the peanut gallery.

Yes, was already corrected by another and I updated my post. But thanks for chiming in 🙂

Do they still seriously sell those there? I remember when they sold those on the street on Khao San! And if I remember correctly, it was only a few hundred baht! lol

Depends on one's definition of luxury. Luxury can be real, or it can be that of wannabes. They must be quite small units if they're truly real luxury at that price.

Thanks for that! Yeah, it would be a bit odd to be wearing a full faced helmet, riding a bicycle. I think the title put my mind into motorcycle mode, since it said "bike crash" and in the article it said "bike accident". I completely missed where it said "cycling". I didn't read the bit below the pic, as I figured it was just some sort of description of the pic and him being a footballer.... Knowing that "bike" can be ambiguous, journalists would do better to use the word "bicycle" or "motorcycle" and avoid colloquial terms like "bike".

Yes, I addressed some of that in other parts of my post that you didn't quote from. I agree to some extent. But when is the last time you've seen Thais wandering around towns (not beach towns) in their swimsuit? And not just some random mental case. And when is the last time you've seen or heard of large groups, like in the pic, drinking illicitly and being rowdy in a family type atmosphere, e.g., on a river open to all tourists? There's a time and a place for things.... And yeah, as for criticism being more sensitive toward outsiders - I mentioned that already, and I don't think it's unusual at all and quite normal around the world. No surprises here.