Bob Crow RIP

Hitler stood up for his beliefs too.

There's a difference between trade unions who help and support their paying members and unions that abuse their power to hold London to ransom.
 
Freefaller said:
I'm not expecting you to give him respect, just have respect for the event that has occurred and bite your tongue rather than making a nasty aggressive comment.

And frankly if this thread starts to degenerate - I'll just close it. No skin off my nose.

I'm not trying to censor people's opinions, there is however, a style, time and place to do things. IT's not about tradition, it's about being a reasonable, compassionate human being, not an animal.

Sure, the argument that this is a public forum and so on is fair, however, we are duty bound as a community to try and make people realise that people need to moderate their behaviour and cannot behave like little brats because they think and feel it is fair and can get away with it.

This is the last I will have on the subject, I'd rather leave the discussion to flow here - which has in general been perfectly okay (bar a few unsavoury comments).

IF you want to take this further I suggest you do it offline with me.
Click to expand...

I haven't been involved in this but this post piques my interest as the Thatcher thread filled with vile abuse far beyond what has gone on in here was left to roll along for ages. Then we get a bit of criticism for Crow which had generally been well presented and you come down on it like a ton of bricks. Double standards methinks.
 
I knew Bob Crow, he was a committed and passionate man who fought for his members and what his members felt was important to them. Personally he was generous, gregarious and likeable...professionally he was tenacious and stubborn. He was not, like some here are intimating a fascist (quite the opposite in fact, he was vehemently anti fascist), neither was he guilty of abusing the position he was elected to do. While I sat on the opposite side of the professional table to Bob Crow, I recognise his worth and commitment to the trade union movement and he doesn't deserve some of the vehemence shown in this thread, either in life or death.

RIP.
 
Tend to agree with what Castiel said. Can't hate the bloke as I didn't know him personally, I only knew from what I read about him in the media (& you all believe what you read don't you?? )

He must've made a fair few enemies during his progress & then tenure, some of which must've been either in or had contacts with the media too, which didn't help him either.

Being the voice & face of a big trade union, these days was never going to make him the most popular of people.

All I do know, is that he must've have had guts & a thick skin, to take the stick that he did from said media, especially the media that leans to the right. That & also to take any nonsense from any management (who I have no respect for if all of them are like the management in my work, I would imagine that they are) I would not have wanted to do his job that's for certain.

I don't envy the person who will take his place.

Respect to the man, spoke his mind & wasn't afraid to do so.
 
robgmun said:
And all Theophany's become "forum celebrity that made people laugh"
Click to expand...

There's a difference you have clearly failed to realise, based on the fact you're now suspended. Nevermind the fact that your response has nothing to do with what I posted in the first place, which is suggestive of the obvious.
 
Theophany said:
There's a difference you have clearly failed to realise, based on the fact you're now suspended. Nevermind the fact that your response has nothing to do with what I posted in the first place, which is suggestive of the obvious.
Click to expand...

What have you done to robgmun to make him follow you around the forum and take pop shots at you constantly? Go on, own up.
 
Janesy B said:
Hitler stood up for his beliefs too.

There's a difference between trade unions who help and support their paying members and unions that abuse their power to hold London to ransom.
Click to expand...

Holding a strike after a ballot isn't an abuse of power, and if holding a strike didn't affect anyone then you'd have to ask questions as to why the jobs existed in the first place. I don't agree with this "holding London to ransom" rhetoric at all. It's not a big place, there are other ways of getting around, and employers were more than accommodating.
 
No1newts said:
I haven't been involved in this but this post piques my interest as the Thatcher thread filled with vile abuse far beyond what has gone on in here was left to roll along for ages. Then we get a bit of criticism for Crow which had generally been well presented and you come down on it like a ton of bricks. Double standards methinks.
Click to expand...

I wasn't a moderator/admin then so didn't have the ability to do anything. I would have done the same then too if I had been able to.

I thought cheering for the death of someone is an abhorrent and disgusting form of behaviour, irrespective of whether your liked them or at least their views and public profile.

I reacted similarly to the disrespectful, "who" comments when someone notable dies - there is no need to post in such threads. You may not care about them, no one may car about them, but, I will try and get decent human behaviour occurring in such threads as I'm sick with all the faux machismo keyboard warrior-troll comments that creep up in these sort of threads.
 
So is good old-fashioned English dark 'gallows humour' allowed or not? It's been part of the English culture since time immemorial and it's not disrespectful in the slightest. It's just what we English do in times of grief and sorrow. We're well known around the World for it.
 
Freefaller said:
I wasn't a moderator/admin then so didn't have the ability to do anything. I would have done the same then too if I had been able to.
Click to expand...

So what you're saying is because you are now a mod, the rules have changed? Things that were acceptable in the past aren't now because they conflict with your personal moral compass?

Surely, the moderating team should have a consistent set of rules that all apply regardless of personal opinion. Otherwise it would be like a policeman who didn't like that kids are able to buy energy drinks being legal, going around and arresting shop keepers because 'in his opinion' it should be against the law.

Being part of a moderating team should be the ability to realise that just because you don't like something, doesn't mean you should shut down or threaten others unless there is a common agreement amongst all and the rules being updated to state so.
 
estebanrey said:
So what you're saying is because you are now a mod, the rules have changed? Things that were acceptable in the past aren't now because they conflict with your personal moral compass?

Surely, the moderating team should have a consistent set of rules that all apply regardless of personal opinion. Otherwise it would be like a policeman who didn't like that kids are able to buy energy drinks being legal, going around and arresting shop keepers because 'in his opinion' it should be against the law.

Being part of a moderating team should be the ability to realise that just because you don't like something, doesn't mean you should shut down or threaten others unless there is a common agreement amongst all and the rules being updated to state so.
Click to expand...

Actually no the rules haven't change, in fact there was/is plenty of discussion on the behaviour of people both in this thread, and other threads - and some action was taken in both this thread and Thatcher's and other threads.

I know very well what being part of a moderating team is thank you for your reassurance, and I presume by your last paragraph you know what's going on in the moderator's area?

I am also a regular member, with my own opinions. However that said as an administrator it is my duty to improve the quality of the forums, and tweak policy, hence why we close rubbish threads that add nothing to the forum, delete poor posts that do not add anything either, and address people's posting styles and behaviour.

Adding to this there is a varied cross section of people on the moderating team (that do this in their own time), with all varying backgrounds to help make things more balanced, as we discuss opinions and ideas/rules to ensure a moderate approach to how we run the forums and apply the rules.

The rules have a section saying that people should behave respectfully. Being respectful extends to member's general behaviour on the forum - being crass and rude about someone's passing is not behaving in a respectful manner. So again, nothing has changed. I am not going to create an explicit rule in the FAQs about "RIP" threads - it's basic common sense that a thread about someone passing is not a place to behave like a callous, aggressive and arrogant prig.
 
Freefaller said:
I know very well what being part of a moderating team is thank you for your reassurance, and I presume by your last paragraph you know what's going on in the moderator's area?
Click to expand...

The spectator sees more of the game.

Freefaller said:
The rules have a section saying that people should behave respectfully. Being respectful extends to member's general behaviour on the forum - being crass and rude about someone's passing is not behaving in a respectful manner.
Click to expand...

The rules imply you should be respectful to other members. Crowe was not another member.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating the unfettered demonisation of the recently passed. Rather agreeing with the rational opinion that just because someone has just left this mortal coil, doesn't suddenly change their actions in life.

If someone like Crow or Thatcher were clearly highly divisive, then it is unreasonable to expect a thread upon their death to be purely sombre and well-wishing. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with critiquing or lambasting the policies and ideologies of someone like Crowe here, as long as it isn't just a gleeful expression to the news of his demise.

Afterall, if people waited a year or two before criticising him, the first responses would be "who cares, he's been dead for ages".
 
There's nothing wrong with criticising what they did in their life. Being callous towards their death, or vitriolic postings is not on.

The rules imply respectful posting.
 
Freefaller said:
The rules have a section saying that people should behave respectfully. Being respectful extends to member's general behaviour on the forum - being crass and rude about someone's passing is not behaving in a respectful manner.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you don't visit GD much? :p

EDIT- Unfortunately it seems the comments aren't removed from googles cache though! :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom