Who is it up to if this window is open or closed?

Joint jurisdiction, unless the other person doesn't care.

It's not hard to work these things out between mature people.

Of course mature people on airplanes are a rarity these days.

Cardinal said:

Sure.

....

Click to expand...

That's how it works, donchaknow.... we're all victims. Police brutality !!!!!!!!

ChezC3 said:

N/A

I only fly 1st class, (not show boating, I got a 56" chest, coach just isn't an option.) which to the best of my recollection doesn't have this problem, all of the window is in the seating area of one individual, and besides, my wife gets the window seat that she prefers and I the aisle, which I prefer.

So it don't matter. That's her fight, and if it is one she has to have, she will win it. :lol: it might not be, but I don't ever recall her having this problem...

In a similar instance, I did have a guy sitting in front of me put his hands above his head and hold on to the seat cushion behind his head. A little annoying but not a problem, right? And he's probably not giving it a second thought because he figures it's his seat...

Problem was his first 3 fingers were partially obscuring my in-seat monitor.

So, what was the solution?

I proceeded to push the monitor, tilting it up and down rapidly and repeatedly, clueing this person in to the fact that his paws need to be put elsewhere. He moved them and I continued watching my programming in silent disdain, trying hard to forget his thoughtless intrusion into my personal space.

Click to expand...

This getting interesting, because after reading this thread I'm starting to think I quickly & directly jump to verbal communication far faster than most here.

I would never do what you did, not that I'm knocking it. Nor would I ever play with raising shades up and down in silent defiance. In fact, I'm loathe to invade anyone's space or touch them or their things. But I'm really quick to pipe-up to resolve an issue. So in your case with the monitor encroachment, I would immediately say:

"Hey buddy. Could you move your hands away a little, so you're not blocking my monitor?"

I'd say it nicely, friendly, and with no ill intent, but voiced clearly & directly so my words are easily understood so as to not have any misinterpreting my request.

I rarely have issues when doing reasonable verbal requests of this nature, and I can't even imagine why anyone would waste any time or effort doing anything else.

CHuDWah said:

I had a sorta similar situation in reverse. Flying scares me ****less so I avoid it like the plague. But one time, I had no option and I was in the window seat. I closed the shade because I didn’t want to witness my impending death in the fiery crash that was sure to occur. The couple in the middle and aisle seats (may have been their first flight) wanted to look out the window…THE FOOLS!! They asked me politely enough to open the shade. If they had been dickish about it, I may have been less cooperative. But we resolved the matter to everyone’s satisfaction by my trading seats with the one on the aisle. It even put me closer to the beverage cart so I could anesthetize my paranoia. Course, that was many moons ago when the airlines didn’t pack passengers in like sardines, gave them free meals and cheap booze, and people were more courteous. I didn’t vote because none of the poll options really fit my answer: try to find a win-win compromise.

(BTW, we arrived safely at our destination without incident. :mrgreen




That should be, and used to be, taught by parents.

Click to expand...

Now to me, the bolded sounds like excellent win-win interpersonal problem resolution!

I love stories like this, as simple as the may be. It's amazing how far you can get with a pleasant tone of voice, along with the social lubricant words --> please - excuse me - thank you

When traveling abroad, those three words are the very first one should learn in the native language; then use them!

Thx said:

Borrow my eye shades?

And I disagree on the coin toss, it is equal for both parties that find themselves in a predicament... chance might have put them there, but each party has definite goals here, one with it up, one with it down, two states...

It's leaving the "solution" to chance, but it is unambiguous and will "settle" it.

In general though, it's the one with most of the window that should decide, the other person can shut theirs, perhaps the person in front of them wants it open, we could be here until the sun goes down.

(And there's a solution, should have booked a night flight.)

Thx

Click to expand...

Settling small things with a coin toss used to be a common occurrence. It's old school. I like it, and have done it often. You & I would probably get along in real life.

My kids on the other hand use debit cards, so they never have coins. They and their generation will likely never experience the quick camaraderie and fairness that evolves when two reasonable parties have a coin toss. I hope they at least have experienced the trust & camaraderie that comes out of a "gentlemen's agreement", although that's really old school too!

Chomsky said:

Settling small things with a coin toss used to be a common occurrence. It's old school. I like it, and have done it often. You & I would probably get along in real life.

My kids on the other hand use debit cards, so they never have coins. They and their generation will likely never experience the quick camaraderie and fairness that evolves when two reasonable parties have a coin toss. I hope they at least have experienced the trust & camaraderie that comes out of a "gentlemen's agreement", although that's really old school too!

Click to expand...

Thank you, I bet we would get along.

The first time I flew on a commercial flight I was 11 years old and unescorted... (Las Vegas to Ontario Ca.) the stewardess sat next to me for a few minutes to see if I was nervous or something, but I enjoyed flying back then, nothing felt better than take-off and suddenly being aloft, most exhilarating! (then the feeling of relief after the wheels touch down, you feel like you cheated death itself! lol)

And I liked flying for several decades, but after hearing and seeing the horror stories nowadays: people stranded on the runway for hours and can't get off, people told they have to give up their seat for someone else, people forcibly removed for what seems like "potential" trouble...

I'm glad my travelling days are pretty much over! I don't want to go to the Federal Pen.!

My exploring now will be through the Olympic Forest.



One thing I wouldn't mind doing though, bucket list... take a trip down ol' Route 66, what's left of it.

Thx

Waddy said:

It's your window. If you insist on keeping it open, I will go full back on my seat back until it's right in your lap. Then sleep like a baby.

Click to expand...

You wish seats went back that far.

My seat always goes back. I'm 5'10"...I cant imagine how taller people deal.

But the person in front of me always puts it back...why shouldnt they? But mine is also going back. I need that leg room. And it evens out if the person behind me puts theirs back.

Thx said:

And what about armrests?!

Does the person in the middle get two, which of the others have to give up one, is it first come, first serve, what are the methods of conflict resolution in this case?

Thx

Click to expand...

I'm sympathetic to the person stuck in the middle and try to free up the arm rest for them as much as possible.

Chomsky said:

This getting interesting, because after reading this thread I'm starting to think I quickly & directly jump to verbal communication far faster than most here.

I would never do what you did, not that I'm knocking it. Nor would I ever play with raising shades up and down in silent defiance. In fact, I'm loathe to invade anyone's space or touch them or their things. But I'm really quick to pipe-up to resolve an issue. So in your case with the monitor encroachment, I would immediately say:

"Hey buddy. Could you move your hands away a little, so you're not blocking my monitor?"

I'd say it nicely, friendly, and with no ill intent, but voiced clearly & directly so my words are easily understood so as to not have any misinterpreting my request.

I rarely have issues when doing reasonable verbal requests of this nature, and I can't even imagine why anyone would waste any time or effort doing anything else.

Click to expand...

I understand completely. The problem with doing as you suggested in this particular instance — by me asking the man to move his hands — is that it implies he has a choice in the matter.

I didn’t want to confuse him.

Lursa said:

You wish seats went back that far.

My seat always goes back. I'm 5'10"...I cant imagine how taller people deal.

But the person in front of me always puts it back...why shouldnt they? But mine is also going back. I need that leg room. And it evens out if the person behind me puts theirs back.

Click to expand...

Do you find in coach that the 2 inch recline they give you actually helps? I am about your height and my son in 6'4" and that extra recline does nothing for him. If we are lucky enough to get a cheep flight, I just buy an extra seat so we can both sit in a way to get maximum leg room.

Luckily we mostly travel Southwest and JetBlue so we can buy that extra seat without a huge dent in the budget.

Cardinal said:

How would you have confronted that person?

Click to expand...

If it was not "my window" but it was affecting me badly with glare or something, I would ask the person next to the window if they would because of the glare. I would accept the answer. I could just as easily put on my sunglasses.

But realistically, if they new it was hurting my eyes and did not allow the shade to come down, I would expect DP Mods to give them a DBAJ infraction.:lamo

year2late said:

Do you find in coach that the 2 inch recline they give you actually helps? I am about your height and my son in 6'4" and that extra recline does nothing for him. If we are lucky enough to get a cheep flight, I just buy an extra seat so we can both sit in a way to get maximum leg room.

Luckily we mostly travel Southwest and JetBlue so we can buy that extra seat without a huge dent in the budget.

Click to expand...

It allows me a marginal expansion of my hip joints. I flew to and from Boston in April, in whatever the cheap seats are, for work. I put my seat back and was able to stretch my legs straight all the way under the seat in front of me and my toes stuck out from under the seat in front of me, lol. Luckily no one was sitting there on the way back. I didnt stick them out that far when someone sat there on the way out.

But I was totally engrossed in 3 Billboards in Ebbing, MO and didnt even notice for most of the flight. What a great movie!

Cardinal said:

Benjamin Wittes doesn't offer this detail, but it seems reasonable to me to think that this was a sun beam issue.

Now place yourself in the reverse position: you're the one who wants to sleep and a sun beam from a window that's clearly in the zone of the person behind you is shining directly in your face, and the person in that seat wants to keep the window open. How do you deal with that?

Click to expand...

Turn my head the other way.

year2late said:

If it was not "my window" but it was affecting me badly with glare or something, I would ask the person next to the window if they would because of the glare. I would accept the answer. I could just as easily put on my sunglasses.

But realistically, if they new it was hurting my eyes and did not allow the shade to come down, I would expect DP Mods to give them a DBAJ infraction.:lamo

Click to expand...

:lol:

ChezC3 said:

I understand completely. The problem with doing as you suggested in this particular instance — by me asking the man to move his hands — is that it implies he has a choice in the matter.

I didn’t want to confuse him.

Click to expand...

Well! That's logic on your part I just don't follow.

The conversation can go anywhere it needs to, but I would always start-out reasonable, unless there's some clearly malicious transgression occurring.

"Would you please ... " appears to be a question on paper (electronic or otherwise), and it come's across as pleasant, but it's surely not implying you're subservant in the matter.

Also in the instance you described and most others where I would use the technique we're discussing, the probability is high the individual is not cognizant of his actions being problematic.

Cardinal said:

A sociological rorschach test:

You take your window seat on an airplane and open the window that is unambiguously within your space (it is not, in other words, half on your side and half on the side of the person in front of you or in back of you). A person then takes the seat in front of you, and closes your window in order to sleep. You open it some time later without a word to that person. The person glares at you and shuts it again.

Who is it up to if this window is open or closed?

View attachment 67233471

This is based on the scenario described by Benjamin Wittes at https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/999780789595275265

1)It’s up to you
2)It’s up to the other person
3)Joint jurisdiction
4)Both of you idiots are kicked off the plane
5)To be determined by mortal combat

Keep in mind that though the last option may be the funny sounding one, what you're essentially agreeing to is that the jurisdiction is determined by who is most aggressive in this situation.

Click to expand...

First off, the window placement looks like 99% on my side... so me even considering any "compromise" is purely by my grace...

(And looking at that picture, would the sun really be a problem here? Can you not sleep with the sun at the back of your head?)

But... being the way I normally am, and knowing full well what I just said,^ generally I will be willing to accommodate someone who is having a hard time.

As far as fingers encroaching on my personal screen... I'm going to make a request, and try to frame it so I am not insinuating what an inconsiderate person the offender is... maybe they are unaware of the breach.

1. Benefit of the doubt first.

2. No harm intended, no real harm done.

Thx

Cardinal said:

A sociological rorschach test:

You take your window seat on an airplane and open the window that is unambiguously within your space (it is not, in other words, half on your side and half on the side of the person in front of you or in back of you). A person then takes the seat in front of you, and closes your window in order to sleep. You open it some time later without a word to that person. The person glares at you and shuts it again.

Who is it up to if this window is open or closed?

View attachment 67233471

This is based on the scenario described by Benjamin Wittes at https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/999780789595275265

1)It’s up to you
2)It’s up to the other person
3)Joint jurisdiction
4)Both of you idiots are kicked off the plane
5)To be determined by mortal combat

Keep in mind that though the last option may be the funny sounding one, what you're essentially agreeing to is that the jurisdiction is determined by who is most aggressive in this situation.

Click to expand...

Are you kidding?
When in doubt, you call the stewardess and ask what the rules are.
Even if there are no set rules, you will then have a neutral third party with authority to adjucate.
And if the judgement goes against you, suck it up. Adversity builds character.

Unless of course it's someone hogging the arm rest. Then you cling to their arm with both hands while resting your head on their shoulder and humming romantically.

Chomsky said:

Well! That's logic on your part I just don't follow.

The conversation can go anywhere it needs to, but I would always start-out reasonable, unless there's some clearly malicious transgression occurring.

"Would you please ... " appears to be a question on paper (electronic or otherwise), and it come's across as pleasant, but it's surely not implying you're subservant in the matter.

Also in the instance you described and most others where I would use the technique we're discussing, the probability is high the individual is not cognizant of his actions being problematic.

Click to expand...

Well, it's situational, so perhaps on another occasion I might be inclined to use my words...

The thing is, is that I am a man who gets misunderstood. My presence and demeanor are such that a friendly request doesn't come off as friendly, so in situations like these where getting kicked off the plane for the slightest infraction (there was an incident in coach that happen before take off where the pilot was telling one of the attendants to just get the front gate attendant and they'll get security if need be, that it wasn't their job to handle disputes) is possible, so I try to be creative.

I'm also not one to take lip.

So at the slightest resistance I'm just as likely to tell the guy, "Put your hands on your lap, Ah tah tah, :naughty this isn't a discussion, Hands. Lap. Eyes. Forward. Thank you."

Which he'll do. But now we have a hostile environment and a nervous cabin.. I'm ON VACATION!!!

I don't want this.

So it's not a case where I'm afraid to speak up, or won't speak up if need be, or that I at first go to little passive aggressive demonstrations rather than address the situation head on, like I said, it's situational. It's a case based on the people involved, the environment we're in, and my level of aggravation.

Cardinal said:

A sociological rorschach test:

You take your window seat on an airplane and open the window that is unambiguously within your space (it is not, in other words, half on your side and half on the side of the person in front of you or in back of you). A person then takes the seat in front of you, and closes your window in order to sleep. You open it some time later without a word to that person. The person glares at you and shuts it again.

Who is it up to if this window is open or closed?

View attachment 67233471

This is based on the scenario described by Benjamin Wittes at https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/999780789595275265

1)It’s up to you
2)It’s up to the other person
3)Joint jurisdiction
4)Both of you idiots are kicked off the plane
5)To be determined by mortal combat

Keep in mind that though the last option may be the funny sounding one, what you're essentially agreeing to is that the jurisdiction is determined by who is most aggressive in this situation.

Click to expand...

The woman's action dictate it stays the **** open, even if I'd rather it stayed closed. You don't close someone else's window (even if you think it's a joint window, which it is not in this case) without consulting them. Ironically judging by the light it looks like the window in her seat is open.