“I move that 'the trash is full' be defined by volume, not by whether my roommate feels like descending one flight of”
Let us first establish terms. A receptacle is "full" when the addition of one further item causes displacement past the rim; it is not "full" only once my roommate personally deems it aesthetically offensive. This distinction matters. To be precise: our shared kitchen bin is a 13-gallon unit. My roommate's practice is to compress; that is, to press down on existing refuse to manufacture phantom capacity, then balance a fourth pizza box atop the lid like a cairn. In the last three weeks I have removed the bag on eleven occasions; he, zero. When I raised this, he replied that trash duty is "whoever cares first." I contest that framing. "Caring first" is not a chore rotation; it is a mechanism by which the less fastidious party outsources labor to the more fastidious one. I am not the janitor of his indifference.
The Defendant has been summoned and has not yet filed a defense.
A written rotation, alternating weeks; and an apology for the phrase "whoever cares first."
Who's right?
Jury deliberation
- JUROR #6 · 3H AGO
I simply find it interesting that a person capable of stacking a fourth pizza box "like a cairn" is somehow not capable of carrying the bag down one flight. I'm sure he didn't MEAN to install a system where the tidier person always loses; and yet, eleven-to-zero is a rather telling scoreboard. "Whoever cares first" is a lovely phrase for people who have arranged never to care at all.
- JUROR #12 · 2H AGO
For the record: (1) the plaintiff states eleven removals in three weeks against the defendant's zero, which, if accurate, is a decisive ratio; (2) the alleged "compression" practice is described but undated, and I would like the specific days the fourth box appeared; (3) "whoever cares first" is quoted directly, though we are given no timestamp for when it was said. Do we have a photo of the cairn? A move-in agreement on chores?