A dispute amongst friends

A couple of friends of mine had a petty little dispute, and we all agree that it would be nice to get some opinions from an objective viewpoint. If you don't want to weigh in on a petty dispute, or don't like the fact that we have decided to take it to an objective third party, then please don't feel obligated to actually read or respond.

The two friends had gone out to buy pizza and soda. They were sitting in the den, ready to start their meal. One friend (call him "The Pourer") had the soda bottle and was filling the cups. The other friend (call him "The Drinker") put his cup down to be filled. "The Pourer" has a habit of filling people drinks to the brim as a joke, often laughing and saying "say when" when doing so. He filled the cup until it the soda was brimming over the edge. "The Drinker then picked up the soda and drew it to him, but he did so over the pizza, causing some of the soda to spill on the pizza.

The Drinker's argument is that the soda was bound to spill due to the Pourer's shenanigans. And if it was going to spill, then he was going to make sure it was over the pizza the Pourer was going to eat, rather then all over his own floor or table. He considered it "poetic justice"

The Pourer's argument is that the he was in no way responsible for the spilling. The soda only spilled because the Drinker decided to pick it up and move it. He gave a possible alternative where the Drinker could have went around to the soda, got on his knees, and sipped it up before taking it.

The Drinker's rebuttal is that he shouldn't have to get down on his knees and sip it up like a dog. The other guy was being a jerk by filling it over the edge, and shouldn't be surprised or upset then the soda gets spilled.

I personally think the Drinker was wrong here. The guy pouring was being a jerk, but the drinker just acted like a baby by bringing the soda over the pizza, knowing it was too full not to spill. He should have just got down on his knees and sipped the soda on top before taking it.

But I am not considered objective, knowing both the parties involved and having preconceived notions about each of them. Sowe would like the pose the question to you. Who was being more of a jerk here.

I'd say the pourer.

Drinker. Damnit, you don't ruin good pizza as a pay back for a harmless joke. Bend over the table and take a sip.

The drinker. I pour my cups to the brim quite often, and sometimes it's hard to account for the fizz, so saying that the pourer is being a jerk for doing so is not really fair, unless he had intended for the drink to spill--which he didn't, or else he could have just overfilled it anyway. Now, even if the pourer was some unscrupulous jackass, the drinker took it upon himself to return the favour, instead of simply ignoring it and sipping the drink he was going to drink anyway. If he wants to complain about getting on his knees "like a dog" then he should consider the fact that SOMEONE ELSE poured his drink for him. Not only did he act like a baby because of a problem that could have easily been solved, but then he went and ruined a perfectly good pizza.

I have heard that my original was completely biased on the part of one party. I used "loaded language" and lead people to believe that one of the two parties was right and that the other was wrong.

For the sake of objectivity, I want say that I was considered to be favoring. But do you think the original post created bias, and if so who for?

I have heard that my original was completely biased on the part of one party. I used "loaded language" and lead people to believe that one of the two parties was right and that the other was wrong.

For the sake of objectivity, I want say that I was considered to be favoring. But do you think the original post created bias, and if so who for?

cthulhuspawn82

Both of them need to grow up. Both are at fault for thinking one is better than the other to not stoop to the level of an immature child.Sajedene

Pretty much what she said. That's so childish.

The drinker. He is at the mercy of the pourer. If he wants his drink filled to whatever he wants he can fill his own drink. He needs to be less lazy and say hey pass the soda so I can fill up my drink instead of thrusting it upon the pourer. If the pourer then says no I got this, then proceeds to purposely do it then the yes its pourers fault. This story is just the drinker getting upset for having someone do work for him and its not up to his standards. Pay the pourer and you'll get what you want. I hate the drinker soooo much!!!!!

The drinker is in the wrong.

Sure, the pourer was being a bit stupid, but kicking up a fuss because he spilled a bit of his drink on his pizza? Seriously nothing to get so worked up about, if that happened to me with my friends, we'd either laugh about it or just shrug it off.

But to be honest, both of them sound rather childish and should grow up.

One more little detail I didnt get in the quick explanation I recived. There was actually a 3rd person, a 3rd pizza eater. So that person became and innnocent victim.

One more little detail I didnt get in the quick explanation I recived. There was actually a 3rd person, a 3rd pizza eater. So that person became and innnocent victim.

cthulhuspawn82

Neither, because it didn't really happen! This is clearly a hypothetical question, and you are experimenting on us ::x. If itwas a real example then booze would be involved :lol:.

Honestly though they were both being silly, but as the drinker was the one who ruined the pizza, the blame is on him.

The "Pourer" knew the consequences of his actions, I'm sure if it happened the "Drinkers" pizza it would have added to the lulz.

I think all parties involved should have a time-out.