Bookshops could charge for browsing

[danskmacabre]

Originally Posted by MovieBird

I try to get technical reference books in electronic (usually PDF) whenever possible, because ctrl+F [keyword] is a vastly superior way to find that formula I need. Combine that with a linked table of contents, and I'm in reference heaven.

I hate flipping through physical pages looking oh so slowly for things now.

Yes, that's a very good point, I have several manuals in PDF format as well. and I read them on my tablet or PC.
Having the manual open in pdf format is dead handy when coding on my pc, as you say for search purposes etc.

[Laridae]

Originally Posted by TGS

What you seem to be pointing to here is the possible economic impact of browsing but not buying. You haven't provided an argument to show that it's an ethical issue.

But that's just the thing about Conscience, you see - if it doesn't bother you then it's not an issue. It's not a matter of Proof.

[taustin]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

An opinion can have less weight than another because it is based on vague opinions rather than facts,

It is a fact that a sale person who is helping someone who has no intention of buying anything cannot help someone who will at the same time. It is a fact that a sales person who works on commission cannot make a commission from someone who does not buy anything.

Like that?

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

or can have less weight because it is plain bonkers.

Feel free to provide an objectivce definition of "bonkers." You can't. There isn't one. It is you opinion that something is bonkers.

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

Not all opinions are equal, and it's irrelevant if it's my opinion or someone else's.

See abovce.

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

If someone has the opinion that 2+5 is 4, that opinion should probably get less weight than the opinion that the answer is 7.

This isn't math. There are no objectivce definitions in morals or ethics.

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

But in your response to my hypothetical, I guess that person would also say it's less unethical if you browse a store but don't talk to any salespersons, or if you're the only one in the store so the possibility of interfering with a potential sale is nil.

One would presume.

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

I don't know, if that person's opinion leads to arbitrary results when applied to a slightly tweaked scenario, maybe their opinion about the ethics of the original situation is faulty and should be given less weight.

I note that you have not yet managed to actually admit that you believe it's OK to go in to a store and tie up their sales people with no intention of buying anything, costing them the opportunity for that sales person to sell something to someone else (and possibly make a commission of their own), but that seems to be your position. Is that correct? Do you, in fact, think it's "bonkers" for the store and the sales person to find that less than desirable?

[taustin]

Originally Posted by TGS

What you seem to be pointing to here is the possible economic impact of browsing but not buying. You haven't provided an argument to show that it's an ethical issue.

Only if you, as you have, ignore the part of "having not intention of buying," I suppose.

Perhaps you'd like to respond to what I actually said, instead. Or perhaps not.

[QofResh]

There's nothing wrong with browsing - provided you then buy at that store if you like the product. What's being objected to is using the store to examine the goods, and THEN buying the products elsewhere. That's just... wrong.

What if I download a sample of a book from Amazon onto my Kindle, read it, decide that I want the book, but proceed to purchase it from a brick & mortar store. Is that just as wrong?

[HansTWN]

Originally Posted by QofResh

What if I download a sample of a book from Amazon onto my Kindle, read it, decide that I want the book, but proceed to purchase it from a brick & mortar store. Is that just as wrong?

To make this example a little more accurate: if you buy it from Amazon, then tie up their customer service with numerous e-mails, then return it to buy somewhere else -- yes, that would be equally wrong. unless customer service did something to annoy you.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by Laridae

But that's just the thing about Conscience, you see - if it doesn't bother you then it's not an issue. It's not a matter of Proof.

Again, by invoking "Conscience" you are implying that the question of whether this is an ethical issue is already settled in favour of the affirmative - which is just the point at issue. As far as I can understand what you are saying you seem to be simply asserting two things: 1, browsing without buying is an ethical issue, and 2, browsing without buying has a negative ethical value. But you have not told me in virtue of what you think that 1 is true - other than that you think or feel it's true, and therefore 2 simply doesn't arise.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by taustin

It is a fact that a sale person who is helping someone who has no intention of buying anything cannot help someone who will at the same time.

So it not an issue if you shoo salesmen away as soon as they approach? (Which I always do anyway, whether I'm buying or not.)

It is a fact that a sales person who works on commission cannot make a commission from someone who does not buy anything.

Or from someone who never enters the store in the first place.
Whether I go in or not, I do not affect that outcome.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by taustin

Only if you, as you have, ignore the part of "having not intention of buying," I suppose.

Perhaps you'd like to respond to what I actually said, instead. Or perhaps not.

Having re-read all your posts in this thread You have still not demonstrated in virtue of what does "having not intention of buying" (sic), have an ethical value? All you have done is expressed a feeling about it - which is not the same thing at all.

[GeoffC]

Bookshops are built to browse in - that's why Waterstones (in Aberdeen) allows you to browse a book whilst you buy a coffee - nothing in the store says you have to buy the book ....

[NickyWithNook]

Bookstores, and indeed a lot of stores, are set up so that if people have time to kill they might spend it there, as the more time people spend in a store, the more likely they are to spend money, and the more money they're likely to spend. There's nothing wrong with going into a store to browse. That's part of the point of setting up a brick-and-mortar store. People stopping in when they're in the area and have a little extra time, and then maybe buying something if something catches their eye, is one of the advantages they have over Amazon.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by taustin

I note that you have not yet managed to actually admit that you believe it's OK to go in to a store and tie up their sales people with no intention of buying anything, costing them the opportunity for that sales person to sell something to someone else (and possibly make a commission of their own), but that seems to be your position. Is that correct? Do you, in fact, think it's "bonkers" for the store and the sales person to find that less than desirable?

I can see you're hoping for a "gotcha" moment here, but I fully admit what "seems" to be my position.

If a store sets up their business in such a way that they provide sales people to assist customers, on the assumption that an assisted customer is one that is more likely (but not guaranteed) to buy, then I don't have a problem with someone getting the offered assistance. A person not buying, even after someone has helped them, is the cost the business has chosen to pay in setting up their business in the manner they did. Any time a salesperson helps anyone, he or she is taking a risk that there's a better customer somewhere in the store that he or she is missing out on.

The salesperson might be annoyed at a browser, but being annoyed at someone doesn't equal that someone having acted unethically. And just as an aside, I like how you shifted the goalposts in the above from "unethical" to "less than desirable".

I also like how you've limited your example to commissioned salespeople. So do we agree that, in the case of a bookstore, which probably doesn't have any commissioned salespeople, it's not reasonable to say someone with no intention of buying has acted unethically, even if they "waste" a salesperson's time?

[Geralt]

Originally Posted by murraypaul

So it not an issue if you shoo salesmen away as soon as they approach? (Which I always do anyway, whether I'm buying or not.)
Or from someone who never enters the store in the first place.
Whether I go in or not, I do not affect that outcome.

Me too.
I hate when the salesman approach me. Just leave me the heck alone, I know why Im here for. The only thing I take from brick and mortar shop is physical space. Maybe if we could browse from outside that would please the lady in the OP's post. Why the hell not, it just another ridiculous idea..

I wish all shops are like the one in Black Books.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJg_WMw56Hw

Bookshops should be unique and quirky. The moment you make it in to a business chain you lost something. I miss Europe

[piperclassique]

Bookshops should be unique and quirky. The moment you make it in to a business chain you lost something. I miss Europe b

What, all of it? I can think of only one independent bookshop within 100km of my bit of rural France. FNAC (chain) 60 km and a single small independent 25km, and another chain that's mostly periodicals at 20km. The independent shop has books only in french. The only half decent public library is attached to a university in the same town as the FNAC. Thank you Gutenberg, Baen, and manybooks. Thank you also Amazon, even if I got my Paperwhite six months after the rest of you. Thank you mobileread for your library, for the pd books nicely formatted and the reading recommendations. Coffee in a bookshop? Dream on. Chairs in a bookshop? You jest, surely. If I am really lucky I might find a book with the cellophane removed.....

[Geralt]

Lol, maybe life in rural France is not the same as life in Prague or Budapest. My idea of Europe I must say refers to a lifestyle more closer related to Central and South-East Europe and not rural France. And of course online shops are nice thing to resort to, but every small town should have one or two of these quirky shops with more then one antiquary shop for books. And most towns in areas of Europe I mentioned have that. Same as I cant imagine every coffee shop in Prague turning into a Starbucks, I cant imagine every bookshop turning into chain store.

In comparison to where I'm currently living where 99.9% of shops are chain bookstores.