Stories when filling up at "gasoline station"

[n1das]

I have a couple of stories after going out of town last weekend. I was on a trip to Louisville, KY. A colleague was riding with me. Louisville is 630 miles from my house, and he lives 50 miles from me on the way there, so I picked him up on the way. He didn't believe me when I told him we'd make Louisville on one tank. We not only made it to Louisville, but drove around town Thurs., Fri., Sat. and Sun., and made it about 40 miles outside of Louisville before I stopped to fill up. I could have gone farther, the ScanGauge was showing 1.7 gallons till empty.

The real story didn't happen until I got home and filled up a couple of days later. I was filling up at the local Kroger, which was unusually busy at the time. There was an Indian guy filling up an SUV on the other side of the island. He must have been a tourist or passing through. He looked and saw me filling diesel and said "you're car is diesel?" I said yes, and he replied "no petrol?" I said "no it's all diesel." He had a really strong Indian accent and said something that I didn't understand at first. Then I realized he was asking me how many miles I got on a tank. I told him I've gone over 700, and he was shocked. He asked "what kind of car... is Fiat?" I said "no, it's a Volkswagen." He walked around to the front of the car and said "oh, VW, German, very nice." He continued talking and I didn't understand half of what he said, so I just nodded my head and laughed when he laughed. Then his pump clicked off and he said goodbye.

The TDI's tank range nails it every time, whether it's a passenger with you on a long trip or during an encounter at the pump.

 

[mobicPhobia]

Nice story, but my BS detector is going off. First of all, Kroger doesn't have a $1 per gallon discount program. The most you can get is 15 cents per gallon if you have a Kroger Master Card. With just a Kroger card alone, you get 3 cents per gallon off, but if you spend $100 on groceries you get a 10 cent per gallon discount.

Seems to me your BS detector is faulty.

 

[RiceEater]

This one may not belong here and its not that funny but...Thousands and thousands of years ago one of the first jobs budding new ChemEs get is to test fuel. Their standard tools are a sample bomb and a bomb calorimeter. The guys at the airport generally fill it up, look and say “Yeah, it’s the right color, Let ‘er rip.” Well, guess what after years and years of this routine suddenly the people at the airport locks these now middle aged ChemEs up for what? A bomb? More than 1 bomb? Well these two guys have been certifying safe aviation for the past several years at the same airport and now you’ve got them locked up? Now you don’t want them to call a sample bomb a sample bomb or a bomb calorimeter a bomb calorimeter anymore.
People are sooo STUPID.

[ June 07, 2002, 20:36: Message edited by: RiceEater ]

I would never believe that stupid cops can learn but I guess these Keystone Kops have. Now they just wave the ChemEs through if they know them. They don't even want to look at the equipment or the manifest. I guess they figured out what aviation safety means.

 

[40X40]

Seems to me your BS detector is faulty.

Remember all those pics you took of the perps? Post 'em.

Bill

 

[travelerII]

Remember all those pics you took of the perps? Post 'em.

Bill

While publishing the pictures regarding the incident in question would quell any further doubt as to the veracity of said incident, that may not be advisable as the two subjects have not signed a release form. If the two people were photographed as part of a crowd in a public setting, then it wouldn't be a problem, but if only they are present in the photos, then the poster could be sued for slander on top of other things.

 

[Bob_Fout]

While publishing the pictures regarding the incident in question would quell any further doubt as to the veracity of said incident, that may not be advisable as the two subjects have not signed a release form. If the two people were photographed as part of a crowd in a public setting, then it wouldn't be a problem, but if only they are present in the photos, then the poster could be sued for slander on top of other things.

Blur the faces. Done!

 

[Honeydew]

While publishing the pictures regarding the incident in question would quell any further doubt as to the veracity of said incident, that may not be advisable as the two subjects have not signed a release form. If the two people were photographed as part of a crowd in a public setting, then it wouldn't be a problem, but if only they are present in the photos, then the poster could be sued for slander on top of other things.

Pics of the spill, pics of the Dodge, pics of fuel on his car- those would work too without having to show the violators.

I read these guys the riot act while I start taking pictures of everything with my cell phone including the license plate on the back of the truck.

 

[Joester]

even if it is made up it was still funny. i kinda like thinking it really happened.

 

[travelerII]

Blur the faces. Done!

From a legal standpoint, that would work. Also blur any company name/logo and the license plate.

 

[naturist]

From a legal standpoint, that would work. Also blur any company name/logo and the license plate.

My guess is that none of you guys is a lawyer. I'm also guessing that none of you is a photojournalist, either.

While I am neither a lawyer nor a photojournalist, I AM a professional photographer of many years experience, so if I may, I'd like to enlighten you all just a bit.

Assuming that all this happened as described, as long as the OP is not using the photos for advertising purposes, there should be no problem with posting them online, here or elsewhere, without blurring anything. Firstly, this reportedly happened in a public place, within sight of anybody passing by. Under those circumstances, none of the participants have any reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus they can be legally photographed doing anything they happen to choose to do. Model releases or their consent to non-advertising use of the photos are irrelevant.

As for suit for libel or slander, as long as the description of the incident and the photos are both consistent and truthful, neither libel nor slander occurred. Both depend upon there being an element of falseness.

 

[abctdi]

Can anyone say...papparazi?

 

[kennyeicher]

I'll be filling up with ULSD for the first time this afternoon. Looking forward to my next 500 miles!

 

[jbright]

And maybe 600.

 

[Derrel H Green]

I Chicken Out . .

And maybe 600.

I got only 555 miles on ours before I chickened out!

Did not want to take the chance of running out . . . .
Something that should NEVER be done on any diesel!

It took exactly 14.385 gallons of ARCO (BP) to fill it right to the brim.
I filled it up myself when the salesman and I drove to the service
station and filled it up for the 'full tank of fuel' on delivery.

So 38.5 + mpg certainly is not too bad for the first check, considering how
I am 'breaking it in properly' with no steady speeds and not babying it!
My method to that end it to continually flex it from a slower speed to a higher speed
and then back off and allow it to cool off slightly, and then 'do it again SAM'!

Nine hundred plus miles on it now, and it just simply
keeps getting better and better with every mile.

My only disappointment so far are those lousy Bridgestone EL 400-02s.
VW should be hung for placing such a cheap and terrible
tire on such an otherwise excellent automobile.

See:
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=ST&width=205%2F&ratio=55&diameter=16&tireSearch=true&autoMake=Volkswagen&autoYear=2010&autoModel=Jetta+SportWagen&autoModClar=TDI

See at the bottom, number 25!

If you buy a new one, insist that your deal includes a better tire.

 

[PlaneCrazy]

I got only 555 miles on ours before I chicken out!

Heck in the summer I do better than that on my Passat wagon. And it's a gasser!!!

 

[Derrel H Green]

Really

Heck in the summer I do better than that on my Passat wagon. And it's a gasser!!!

So are you saying that you go further than 555 miles on a tank, or are
you falsely saying you get better than 38.5 mpg with your gasser?

BTW, how big is your tank?
What does either comment have to do with any TDI?

I will bet that you did not come anywheres near either of those figures
when you were breaking it in or on your first tank now, did you?

And your 2.0T gasser does not have an automatic tranny now, does it?

BTW, you do know that your old engine has been upgraded don't you?
The one that is available today is not the same engine as your 2007.

Doesn't your Passat require premium fuel also. AND what are
you forced to pay for that expensive fuel up yonder?

 

[Fixmy59bug]

Quit cheatin... =^]

1060km only equals 658.6 miles.

On an 18.5 gallon tank, you are getting 35.6 miles per gallon. And that's assuming you don't fill it to the neck.

 

[travelerII]

My guess is that none of you guys is a lawyer. I'm also guessing that none of you is a photojournalist, either.

While I am neither a lawyer nor a photojournalist, I AM a professional photographer of many years experience, so if I may, I'd like to enlighten you all just a bit.

Assuming that all this happened as described, as long as the OP is not using the photos for advertising purposes, there should be no problem with posting them online, here or elsewhere, without blurring anything. Firstly, this reportedly happened in a public place, within sight of anybody passing by. Under those circumstances, none of the participants have any reasonable expectation of privacy. Thus they can be legally photographed doing anything they happen to choose to do. Model releases or their consent to non-advertising use of the photos are irrelevant.

As for suit for libel or slander, as long as the description of the incident and the photos are both consistent and truthful, neither libel nor slander occurred. Both depend upon there being an element of falseness.

I was a photojournalist, and while you might get away with doing what you said because in most cases, people don't know their rights, the two people in question can still sue and lawyers cost money. Even if they lost the case, you're still in the hook for big bucks. With regards to slander and libel, same thing.

 

[travelerII]

Getting back to the original theme of the thread. I pull into the diesel pump of the Sheetz on my way home. I get out and making sure that the pump really is diesel, start to fill my tank. A big pickup with the characteristic diesel sound pulls up to the opposite side and the guy gets out and starts to fill his tank. Even thought I started pumping first, since I am venting the tank, we both finish at roughly the same time. As I clean up the small spill I caused, the man hangs up his nozzle and then suddenly spoke, "That little car took in more than I thought it would". I replied, "On, I was topping off the tank". The man then solemnly nodded and got back into his pickup and drove off.

So far, in the time I've owned my Golf TDI, I have met so really odd people. When do I meet the swedish bikini team?

 

[PlaneCrazy]

Quit cheatin... =^]

1060km only equals 658.6 miles.

On an 18.5 gallon tank, you are getting 35.6 miles per gallon. And that's assuming you don't fill it to the neck.

I get 36 mpg highway. In summer, AC on, cruise control set to 100 km/h. On 55 mph roads that bumps up to 37 mpg.

Last I checked, 658 miles is just over 100 miles more than 555

But I usually chicken out somewhere between 550 and 600 miles.

Tank is 70 liters = 18.46 gal. I don't fill to the neck, otherwise it throws a check-engine light. Manual recommends premium but it will run on regular. No fuel economy penalty if don't push it, but I do like a little extra oomph in the hills and I live in a fairly hilly area, so I use premium mostly.

My wife's B5.5 TDI gets about 42-44 mpg on the highway; her average is about 35-38 mpg; mine is 33-34 mpg but I do somewhat more highway than her. In 2008 diesel fuel was higher than premium here. The 2.0T was marginally cheaper to fuel, per mile.

At the moment, RUG is running at $1.094 per liter; I paid $1.214 for premium today, my wife paid $1.049 for her last tank of diesel. If I wanted to I could compromise on mid-grade, since I'm not a "performance" driver.

Anyway, I was bragging about range, not fuel costs

 

[jimnms]

Seems to me your BS detector is faulty.

An image can be faked. Before I replied to your original post, I poured over the Kroger website looking for this $1 off deal and I don't see it. I'm not saying you're lying, but you know the saying "if it sounds too good to be true..." If there really is a way to get $1/gal off I sure as hell want to know about it.

I hate to stay off topic, but as for posting the photos, if they were taken in a public place, then as the photographer you have every right to post them. I'm not a professional photographer, just amateur/hobbyist, but I have published and sold a few photos. I bought some books dealing photography and law so I would have a general understanding of my legal rights before publishing my photos. One book, "The Law (in plain English) for Photographers" by Leonard Duboff, states: "it is generally not unlawful to take pictures of a person in a public place or to disclose facts the person has discussed publicly." (p. 50) "Generally, photographers have a right to take pictures so long as they do not invade their subjects' privacy or make public nuisances of themselves." (p. 89).

Another book I have is "Legal Handbook for Photographers" by Bert P. Krages, which gives an example of when taking a photographs in public does not invade someones privacy. "You can usually take a photograph of someone in a public place irrespective of whether it concerns a matter the subject, or even most members of the public, would prefer not to have recorded. For example, courts have held that photographs of a couple caressing at a public market, a fan standing up at a football game with an open zipper, and postal employees standing next to a senator at their workplace did not constitute actionable invasions of privacy. Even though the subjects resented the photography of what they considered to be personal moments, embarrassing situations, or unwanted implied associations, the photographs were take in public places and thus did not involve the kind of private facts encompassed by the tort of intrusion." (p. 37).

 

[danham]

While publishing the pictures regarding the incident in question would quell any further doubt as to the veracity of said incident, that may not be advisable as the two subjects have not signed a release form. If the two people were photographed as part of a crowd in a public setting, then it wouldn't be a problem, but if only they are present in the photos, then the poster could be sued for slander on top of other things.

Newspaper editor, retired after many years, specialty in college while getting my j-degree: communications law.

As others have said, photos taken in a public place are mostly fair game. Putting the subjects in "false light" to make them look like asses (beyond what they really did) is actionable. Slander does not apply; it refers strictly to spoken word. Libel is for published matter and most defamation suits concerning pics are brought under invasion of privacy/false light grounds.

So a pic of these clowns in the gas station is fine unless you put a caption on it that libels them (accuses them of a crime or holds them up to public ridicule, as opposed to sticking to the facts).

Over the years I took or assigned thousands of pics, many of people who later regretted doing what they did in public, and never ever got or asked for a release with one major exception: a very sensitive story about a kid who had been horribly harassed at school and I instructed my photog to get a release from his parents, who had brought the story to my attention.

-dan

 

[danham]

OK, back on topic, here's one that is not so "funny" ...

On our recent trip to FL, I pulled into an Exxon station in MD and searched for the Diesel pump, which was around back. It was, as is too often the case, a mess with spilled fuel, slimy handle and looked like it had been beaten with hammers routinely. At least it took credit cards, I commented to my wife. Hah. It asked me for my home zip -- a reasonable verification step. But I guess one of the daily hammer blows had busted the "2" key on the keypad. Without it, my zip could not be entered.

So I went inside and the attendant, who in very fractured non-English wanted to argue at length about why I was putting Diesel in a car instead of addressing the problem, finally swiped my card at his register, asked how much I was planning to pump, and then went out and pushed some button on the pump and it worked. I proceeded to pump $34.67 worth of ULSD, went in and got my receipt, and left, shaking my head and wondering if the gassers get put through this wringer too. Doubt it.

Now that I am home, I log on to my banking site and see that there are three charges from that station. The first is for the $34.67 I actually spent. The second is a "hold" of $1 -- normal for this type of transaction and certain to disappear before it actually goes on the credit card bill. But the third is for $35 even.

My guess is this is why he asked me to estimate how much I would buy and then erroneously entered it as a sale rather than a "hold" to make sure my card could handle the purchase. I'm sure Visa will straighten it out -- eventually -- but I could have brewed my own fuel from garden scraps in the time I have invested so far [g].

I hope that passenger car Diesel gains market share soon so that we don't get stuck with second-rate pumps that don't work and are filthy, with empty or missing windshield squeegees/towels/gloves. Yes I know gassers spill too and it evaporates, but I have a feeling that until "fussy" car owners start using the Diesel pumps in greater numbers they will continue to get short shrift.

-dan

 

[mobicPhobia]

An image can be faked. Before I replied to your original post, I poured over the Kroger website looking for this $1 off deal and I don't see it. I'm not saying you're lying, but you know the saying "if it sounds too good to be true..." If there really is a way to get $1/gal off I sure as hell want to know about it.

Like I would take the time and energy to whip up a fake image for this thread. When you replied to my original post you pretty much said I was lying. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle isn't it.

First of all, Kroger doesn't have a $1 per gallon discount program. The most you can get is 15 cents per gallon if you have a Kroger Master Card. With just a Kroger card alone, you get 3 cents per gallon off, but if you spend $100 on groceries you get a 10 cent per gallon discount.

Please find the link to the program below this.


Is it really that hard to admit you are wrong?



http://www.kroger.com/in_store/fuel/Pages/cincinnati_fuel_program.aspx

 

[40X40]

Like I would take the time and energy to whip up a fake image for this thread. When you replied to my original post you pretty much said I was lying. Hard to put the genie back in the bottle isn't it.




Please find the link to the program below this.


Is it really that hard to admit you are wrong?



http://www.kroger.com/in_store/fuel/Pages/cincinnati_fuel_program.aspx

About those pics you took... Please post 'em.

Bill

 

[wolfskin]

C'mon guys, this is one of the most enjoyable threads on the forum!
Must we muck it up with this bickering?

If one does not believe the story, fine, I might not either, but you don't absolutely need to prove it fake. It's a bit unlikely, admittedly, but not absurd, so could we all just individually decide if we believe it or not, and move on?

 

[CheesyRider]

so could we all just individually decide if we believe it or not, and move on?

No! I say pics or off with his head!

 

[lovemybug]

Hey, most of these stories are entertaining. So what if this one story is a candidate for the Burlington Liar's Club. It's still mildly entertaining.

 

[nicklockard]

This thread is too classic to dilute with high noise.

/nudge-->On topic/Please--moderator.

 

[travelerII]

As a fisherman, I have no issue with a certain elasticity of tales told around a campfire. What say, we all move along and continue to enjoy this most excellent and most assuredly entertaining thread. Anyone interested in hearing my tale about how The Wonderful Vision, Anna Kournikova ended up in my jeep one night?

Getting back on topic, if somewhat obtusely. I had to drive out to Pittsburgh, PA for a continuing education seminar, and I tanked up at the Sheetz at home before I left. Long story short, the Golf did fine on the long drive. I had to stop three times to go to the bathroom. I'm looking forward to the drive back tomorrow.