冇負面影響唔代可以亂來.
比個生保人入你屋行兩個圈四圍望, 除心理影響並無實質損失,
你會唔會日日比生保人入來行兩個圈? 或是只在買家睇樓時, 問
過先比佢入來? 將心比已, 逆地而處, 你會有另一個想法, 畢竟
人就是自私的動物.

我通常買鏡都是把鏡頭對住鋪頭內的光管照入去檢查, 唔知咁做都應否先問准老闆呢?

就係因為將心比心, 所以先要明白人地有咩損失, 咁才會互相諒解.

唔係好明你在比喻什麼, 如果你係要賣樓, 就預左比買家入黎睇,
仲要地產經紀帶親上黎的都係十個有十個都係"生保人" ,睇到
佢o岩又解答到佢d 問題, 對方認為條件ok 就幫你買. 如果你唔想
賣樓唔會日日有"生保人" 入你屋.
打開門當然想做生意, 個客唔係運吉只係要求驗詳細d , 咁你做老闆
會點處理?  趕佢走定好聲好氣解釋佢知你的難處? 自己唸下吧.

另外, 將心比心唔係一面倒, 支持做客的要理解店舖的難處, 要求不要太過.
店人一樣要理解個客帶錢來就想買佢心水野, 左check 右check 係一定,
仲要有耐心解釋客人的問題.
時代進步了, 用返幾十年前那套不行了.

I think:
Customer should have the right to check the products. This is a LAW in HK. But the way of checking varies according to different standards. Some say using torch is common practise but some say it"s not. I am not too sure whether this practise is so common that would be well expected by all sellers in HK. But I do think that if a specific seller does NOT want the buyer to do that, he can raise his concern and then it"s up to the buyer to decide whether he still wants to proceed in the checking or buying process. He can walk out anytime.

The serious problem here is POLITENESS. I don"t think it is right to get FU*Ked by just intending to use torch for checking the lens. As a seller in the market for many years this is not a really unexpected task encountered by him. The vigorous reaction only points to some uncommon reason. As a customer I expect to be treated farily and politely. I do not expect to go in a shop and then get FU*Ked only due to some uncommon reason.

So I think the burden in this case is on the shopper. He should not be rude in the first place. He can refuse the customer in doing that. If the customer keeps proceeding then the excuse to lose the temper is better. Only start FU*King in the very first beginning is unacceptable.

我有一個重要問題:

香港至net超人同心生虫老闆or職員是否彼此認識?

其實sazabi講呢個古仔都唔係想叫人評道理,只不過想吐番一口悶氣,大家唔需要諗住話邊個幫邊個既係咪?始終大家對件事都唔係咁了解咪當聽古仔算囉。其實人地做批發既緊係冇專做零售果d咁好服侍架啦始終做生意方式好唔同你買一兩件野佢地d咀臉緊係唔會好似劉德華咁架啦。你試下去油麻地果欄買袋橙睇下人地賣唔賣俾你?仲要逐個揀添?街邊生果檔就得。

>香港至net超人同心生虫老闆or職員是否彼此認識?

見過幾面, 知佢姓洪, 買過2次野, 係咁多.

re:all
我指出來態度問題, 唔係自己認為o岩既, 就點做都可以, 無實質損害並唔係一
個藉口, 物件唔係你既, 你要買亦未比錢, 點解有權為所欲為? 用強光照射會
否對鏡出問題還是未知點, 不過室內光點照都冇問題就係人都知.

算啦, 幾位認為自己o岩晒, 唔認為買o野都要有適當手法及態度, 請自便, 我
冇o野好講.

>If you guys agree that using a torch to inspect the lens without permission is not a good manner... alright, i am wrong then...

No harm to ask first, I would say. If they found it offensive, just don"t do it. Both parties have their own rights.

>個point就係未問過人就用電筒照個鏡頭係咪唔岩

I think there is no certain answer to that. One has to consider the general practice of most people. Using a torch for inspection is indeed, not that common. This is especially true when experienced photographers who are well aware all lenses are full of flaws inside. By that they see little reason to inspect that way, and might get sensitive to that method. Of course, in this particular case, the shopkeeper was not right to lose his temper. Both the seller and the buyer were at fault, imho. If either party could act more professionally, the nasty situation should not arise at all. It is unfortunate that communication skill which can build or kill a relationship, is often ignored as part of the basic education.

討論之中似乎大家立於兩個對立的立場去看此事,

以老闆的角度看, 客人用電管驗鏡頭, 是無禮的表現;
以客人的角度看, 老闆的惡劣態度, 是絕對令人反感
立場不同, 鬧來鬧去都不會有結果..

sazabi根本就不知道用電管check鏡會令老闆發難, 錯就不在sazabi, 因為他是"無知", 是個人問題; 而老闆的表現是社會問題, 他可以對每一個客人都無禮貌, 是零售業的悲哀...

> 手電筒的光再強都沒有大晴天的日光強吧?

KIDDING, 光過SUNNY 16容乜易....
手上一個爛鬼KYTRON(4AA)既單車燈, 已經係SUNNY 8, 見過SURE-FIRE或其他XENON膽既人, 唔會有呢個問題.