I went to spend the weekend with my parents a couple of weeks ago, and we went out for dinner for my mom's birthday. (She's 29, just ask her!) We had finished eating, and I was sucking up my second glass of Mountain Dew (sweet deliciousness). My dad started giving me a hard time about my "addiction" to pop, and talking about how much money and how many calories I could save if I gave it up. Meanwhile, he was enthusiastically downing a cup of after dinner coffee (...not to be confused with his before dinner coffee...or his midafternoon coffee...or his after lunch coffee...or his midmorning coffee...or his coffee with breakfast...). So I offered him a deal. I would quit drinking pop, cold turkey, if he would do the same for coffee. He had to think about it over night, but in the end, he said yes, and then raised the deal. He said he would give up BOTH coffee AND pop. I told him I would gladly give up coffee too, just so we were even. (Coffee tastes like a skunk's rear end.) The entire weekend he made a big deal about it, telling his house church as he wept over one of his "last cups" of coffee, and making sure my grandparents knew when we went for lunch that he was making the ultimate sacrifice. (And you wonder where I learned to be so dramatic.)
Skip ahead a week. No, not even a week. Like 4 days. I'm doing alright, actually didn't even really have headaches, just a little more tired than usual. MEANWHILE, I am getting reports of CHEATING on my dad's end! When I called him on it, he admitted to it, and then confessed that he was PLANNING to cheat again over the weekend! I KNOW! My dad then had the audacity to suggest that we actually include one day per weekend that we could have the "illegal" substance of our choice, to make the rest of the week easier. (By the way, did I mention that it was also his idea to cut out candy, along with pop and coffee?? He dreams big, I'll give him that...) So, that's all the background info. This is what transpired on Facebook over the next few days. (I'm only including comments pertinent to the discussion, although there were other comments as well.)
ME:
Dear Mr. Olsen,
Your request for a change in terms of your verbal agreement (i.e. promise) with your daughter has been received and reviewed. Unfortunately, it is the decision of this committee that under the terms of the original agreement (i.e. promise), the term review was already scheduled for Christmas, December 25, 2011. It is impossible at this time to move up a renegotiation of terms. Therefore, any consumption of coffee and/or other caffeinated coffee-like beverage will be regarded as cheating, and you will be ridiculed and/or shamed accordingly, until such time as the terms of the original agreement (i.e. promise) are up for renegotiation, on or following December 25, 2011. Thank you for your feedback, and we look forward to your continued input and participation.
Best regards,
The Committee for Renegotiation of Agreements and Promises (CRAP)
DAD:
As founder and supreme high mug holder of CLUCK ...Caffeine Lovers Underground Coffee Klatsch... I will need to consult with CLUCK lawyer I.M. Buzzed about my absolute parental rights to renegotiate all terms and promises.
ME:
Mr. Olsen,
It is incumbent upon me to inform you that as you and Miss Olsen were both adults at the time of the verbal agreement (i.e. promise), the parental role can not and will not be taken into account. We cannot, of course, make your decision for you, but please be advised that breach of this contract will be considered in an future agreements. Please consider your options carefully before bringing Mr. Buzzed into the picture.
Regards,
CRAP
OBSERVER: (woman my dad works with, also one of the whistle blowers to his cheating)
...As communications specialist and current student of ethics, I believe a revisit to the original document is necessary. If, indeed, the focus was to eliminate caffeine, then Rev Cluck was in violation. If the goal was to eliminate those items that are unnecessary for human function, then he was not in violation. One does have to be aware of the adverse effects of eliminating multiple agents at once. While it was a valiant effort to eliminate half of his daily intake of food and caloric count, it might have been more than he anticipated. Recognize too, that with increased age comes and increased chance of dementia and alzheimer's, which clouds judgment.
To summarize, both parties may need to reach a clarifying standpoint to assure that all are on the same page. If the situation continues to escalate, a third party mediator may be necessary to speak to the dispute. Until then, may this serve as notice that others are watching and taking note. Best regards in your future endeavor.
MOM:
The following is a message from the JUDGE!. After careful study of the information provided to me in the case of CRAP vs CLUCK, the following facts have been gathered: Whereas the Plaintiff, Rena Olsen (represented by CRAP) states that the original agreement was set to be renegotiated on December 25th; Whereas Rena Olsen has abided by the terms of said agreement; Whereas the Defendent, Tim Olsen (represented by CLUCK) states that he was not aware that Chai tea had caffeine in it; Whereas Tim Olsen freely admitted to the JUDGE that he did, however, willfully drink 2 caffeinated carbonated beverages and 3 cups of coffee;
The following judgement is rendered: As to the count of drinking Chai tea, the defendent is found NOT GUILTY. As to the 2 counts of drinking carbonated caffeinated beverages, the defendent is found GUILTY. As to the 3 counts of drinking coffee, the defendent is found GUILTY. It is the judgment of this court that the defendent shall pay the plaintiff $5 per incident, for a total judgment of $25 that the defendent owes the plaintiff.
...
And that's how I made $25.
