Keeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-rect! May you stroll barefoot on clouds, soft grasses, and warm smooth pavement!
What do you require in this instance? A photo of a lot of heavy glass bottles? Some places represent a greater risk than others. Compromise isn't a sign of defeat, it's vital to a functioning world, otherwise you get stand-offs everywhere (in politics it's known as diplomatic negotiation; it helps to stop wars from happening!). If the shop assistant has as much 'belief' in her viewpoint as nus has in his, we end up with two dogs having a tug-of-war over a stick. To his credit, nus acknowledges the importance of compromise in certain circumstances.
I wasn't suggesting for one moment that I should make decisions for you (how on earth would that work?!). I was just tipping the hat in your direction for this outburst of sensibleness earlier: Oh well. You try; you do what you can! (to quote Bill Hicks).
PA is pretty "shoe natzi" but i was there back in 2005 and got away with it suprisingly in Pittsburgh and Scranton
I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Compromise is about two willing parties making concessions based on honesty and relevant information. The shop assistant compromised on nothing, instead based her judgement call on fear, ignorance (probably on the part of the shop owner) about the threat of legal liability. Barefoot customers, in this type of standoff, must fight back otherwise ignorance wins and nothing changes! Thankfully I will never have these sorts of standoffs down here in New Zealand, ugly violence may be the result! (just kidding, hehe!)
Shop owners who claim "liability risk" for barefoot patrons are just plain ignorant, pure and simple. Check how many lawsuits have been filed over the years for injuries from patrons wearing high-heel shoes or flip flops (thousands), versus how many that were barefoot (almost non-existent). Plus the barefoot customer is entering at their own risk and by their own choice, and therefore a store could not be held liable for injuries. If the person tried to sue (no self-respecting barefooter would, but if they did) the person would pretty much have zero case.
Well before I answer, try writing something that comprises a complete sentence (composed grammatically), that conveys what you're attempting to convey. Then we will have a clue as to what language you wish to use.