Date: April 12th, 2012 7:17 PM Author: Peach arousing cuck stag film
Here is what happened:
5 people, bill came out to be $78.
I had zero cash, so I was going to put my card down and take the cash.
But one of the other people had a 100 bill that he put down and he took the cash that was there.
So at this point, I put down my card and took the 100 bill, and when it came back, I wrote down 120 after tips, because I thought I needed to pay for my food (since I just took 100 from the pool).
So this ended up being a 50% tip for the restaurant. And now I'm thinking the guy who put down the 100 prob expects me to pay him back a 20 at some point.
Date: April 12th, 2012 7:24 PM Author: abusive dull location jew
ummm that's what makes the situation so incredibly weird brother. there was a literally ONE IN A MILLION chance uvt would handle this in a fucktarded manner and yet... effing weird bro i cant wrap my head around it
Date: April 12th, 2012 7:50 PM Author: abusive dull location jew
yeah honestly we've all been getting progressively more steamed and jealous re yr long list of impressive achievements. i myself am actually even more pissed about the situation than most bc i think i might also be too dumb to mentally reconcile how one person can have such a host of talents and also be capable of stuff like this thread and yr posting in general
Date: June 10th, 2024 3:45 AM Author: Mind-boggling Goyim
The guy who put in the $100 and took out "the cash" from the other three people which was presumably $60 (three people throwing in $20 each) is in for $40, assuming you don't pay him anything in the future (well, the future 12 years ago). You then threw in $20 on top, making it so that you're in for $20 assuming no transfers to $100 bill guy. If he asks you for $20 then you've paid $40 and he's paid $20. This presumably being the case then in retrospect you should have paid $100 on your card and told him you'll get him the $20 later.
Date: June 10th, 2024 5:15 AM Author: Umber blood rage
This is wrong and overcomplicating things
Mr. High-roller had already baked in a 25% tip when he threw the $100 down. OP then unnecessarily added another 20% tip on top of that. Thus, OP should be out the cost of his own meal, the pro-rata cost of the 25% tip, and 100% of the cost of the 20% tip he added of his own volition.
Date: June 10th, 2024 6:01 AM Author: Mind-boggling Goyim
What I said is both correct and as elegantly simple as possible given the available information and uncertainty of maybe being asked to transfer $20 to $100 bill guy and maybe not. OP didn't add another 20% tip, he added $20 which is his $15.60 meal plus $4.40 tip. He did this because otherwise he'd be paying net zero at that moment. However, OP overlooked the possibility of being asked for $20 from $100 bill guy at a later time. To not have had this misunderstanding, either $100 bill guy needed to have clarified that he expected a further $20 cash from OP or OP needed to have clarified that nothing further would be expected to be paid to $100 bill guy. The onus for clarification is likely more on OP, though, since by adding $20 for his meal he implicitly presumed he owed nothing to $100 bill guy, but later realized that he may indeed owe him $20, so the confusion was primarily localized within him and his resulting actions.
To resolve the situation, OP could either accept that he had acted presumptuously by assuming he owed nothing to $100 bill guy and graciously absorb the "idiot tax" by giving a full $20 to him, or OP could potentially explain to $100 bill guy that he had added $20 on top for the meal in good faith, assuming that $100 bill guy was "square" at that moment and was owed nothing, but since $100 bill guy doesn't feel square that they should split the extra $20 that was paid, $10 each.