top | item 46991599

(no title)

throw7 | 17 days ago

Queueing culture is hilarious. Indians > Italians (ok, Italians are probably more entertaining), brits (I imagined them trying to bring queueing to indians and gave up... although india does have a semi-line culture in limited ways nowadays). As an american, grocery checkout queueing always angered me.

discuss

order

jazzpush2|17 days ago

Queuing culture is just baseline respect from my POV. Same with not littering, respecting shared (public) resources, etc.

Actually quite unbelievable to see it considered hilarious.

jchanimal|17 days ago

Certain workflows prefer non-queueing, for instance the throng empowers the bartender to load balance different groups, delay drinks to over consumers, etc etc. So other cultures can have those workflows in places we might not expect, that is not necessarily a matter of respect. In pub culture, queueing disrespects the bartender.

profsummergig|17 days ago

> Queuing... not littering, respecting shared (public) resources

Well, Indians are the pits in all 3, so your definition computes.

Source: am Indian.

bsder|17 days ago

> As an american, grocery checkout queueing always angered me.

It should, because practically everywhere in the US does it wrong. There should be a single entry queue that distributes to the multiple handlers. Instead, you wind up with multiple queues so that people get hung up behind someone causing slow handling.

The one that infuriates me are bank queues. Look, folks, both queuing theory and experience show that you CANNOT have a single handler without your queue time going to infinity. So, how many active tellers do I always see on the unusual times I have to go into the bank? Exactly one. Always. And a queue that's backed up 6 deep.

toast0|17 days ago

> There should be a single entry queue that distributes to the multiple handlers.

Sure, that's more fair. But it also means everyone has to walk over to the queue entry. And often requires dedicated floorspace. If there's not good queuing discipline, it leads to larger gaps between customers at the registers and poor throughput. If there's a queue minder (which there probably should be in order to distribute people into subqueues), that person can steer customers to benefit their favorite register people: this was common at Fry's; register operators got a commission, so and some queue mindets would collude steer expensive carts to preferred registers.

Multiple independent queues works fairly well and avoids extensive coordination. Even if people don't like it.

anigbrowl|17 days ago

Instead, you wind up with multiple queues so that people get hung up behind someone causing slow handling.

Have you tried not caring about how fast the other queue is moving? IF you are in a hurry then most stores have 'quick registers' for people who are buying less than 10 or some similarly low number of items. And obviously if you get behind someone with a full cart you'll be waiting a bit longer, but you can only guess about the last person in the queue. But if I'm not in a hurry and have too many groceries to go through the express lane, I don't see the point in staring at other lines and being upset if one is moving faster than yours. Over time this is one of those things that just averages out.

phainopepla2|17 days ago

> It should, because practically everywhere in the US does it wrong

Where do they do it differently? I've been in grocery stores across Western Europe, Asia and Latin America, and the only place I recall seeing the single entry queue was at a Trader Joe's in NYC

pmarreck|17 days ago

I hear the Chinese don't even have a word for it >..<