Declan Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Now as a member, a Mod can also have views on topics, and can also discuss these with other people etc. So if one such person decides - Hey, I'll have a look in on this topic, then so be it. But members of this forum who encourage others to join this forum to flame a thread they disagree with have been banned in the past. So if a mod, who has a position of responsibilty, and a say in the inevitible mods forum discussion on what to do about the thread, did that it would be worse. But that didn't happen did it? A mod "who didn't like the way things were going" didn't request that you join this site. And all this softening and softening of the actions of the mod in your posts, just show that you made it up. Here's the IOM TT thread on the subject. It wasn't started by a member of this forum. No MF Mod posts on that thread. The only MF member who posts is Slim, who posts in support of the orginal thread. He asks that rather than mindlessly condemning it people read it for themselves. You do this sort of thing a lot. You make a bold statement, thinking you won't get challenged but people seek clarification, and your story changes a bit. Then a bit more, and you wriggle and evade and hope that people will give up. Yet finally the truth comes out and it's miles from what you said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 So, in a nutshell, you are saying that so long as there are tourists and revenue streams, we should accept the deaths that arise as a result? Without compunction. Thats the thin end of a very large wedge.... Well if its ok for the Ski slopes then its OK for us. How many motorists under 25 have been killed on Manx open roads in the last 12months We need a new Internet law about how long it takes for a TT death thread to be related to skiing or mountaineering! And I dont understand your point about motorists dying on the roads.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Our government seem much more interested in the volume of extra income to be made than the lives lost each year which get cast aside as free advertising medium As a taxpayer forcefully financing these events I can have as much say as I sodding well want, whether I race or not As a taxpayer you get more back for your money through the TT/MGP than any other Government funded event Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC-Drift.com Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 In what way? ...four weeks of misery for me mate, I work throughout Douglas and need access both sides of the access road frequently, and to cap it off I live up north for which I have the pain of having to travel via Laxey once I manage to get through the gridlocked traffic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 As a taxpayer you get more back for your money through the TT/MGP than any other Government funded event Figures? Proof? Source? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KMC Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Now as a member, a Mod can also have views on topics, and can also discuss these with other people etc. So if one such person decides - Hey, I'll have a look in on this topic, then so be it. But members of this forum who encourage others to join this forum to flame a thread they disagree with have been banned in the past. So if a mod, who has a position of responsibilty, and a say in the inevitible mods forum discussion on what to do about the thread, did that it would be worse. But that didn't happen did it? A mod "who didn't like the way things were going" didn't request that you join this site. And all this softening and softening of the actions of the mod in your posts, just show that you made it up. Here's the IOM TT thread on the subject. It wasn't started by a member of this forum. No MF Mod posts on that thread. The only MF member who posts is Slim, who posts in support of the orginal thread. He asks that rather than mindlessly condemning it people read it for themselves. You do this sort of thing a lot. You make a bold statement, thinking you won't get challenged but people seek clarification, and your story changes a bit. Then a bit more, and you wriggle and evade and hope that people will give up. Yet finally the truth comes out and it's miles from what you said. For the last time Declan, I am not going to name anyone, not to you or anyone else. You can believe what you want, but I am certainly not a lier. And I was certainly not invited to flame anything ( These are your words by the way ) You brought up this matter from two years ago in order to discredit me earlier in this thread, but I will stand by and repeat, that I am not a lier. Now, can you please let this drop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Personally, I don't think a name is important. I'd just like clarification on whether Mod X requested that you join this site. I don't think that's a particularly onerous or difficult question to answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 You brought up this matter from two years ago in order to discredit me earlier in this thread, but I will stand by and repeat, that I am not a lier. I didn't bring this matter up. I only responded to a post you made. Anyone can verify that, but you're still twisting what's happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 You brought up this matter from two years ago in order to discredit me earlier in this thread, but I will stand by and repeat, that I am not a lier. I brought up your motives for joining the forum. You claimed it was at the request of a mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hagar the horrible Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 Our government seem much more interested in the volume of extra income to be made than the lives lost each year which get cast aside as free advertising medium As a taxpayer forcefully financing these events I can have as much say as I sodding well want, whether I race or not As a taxpayer you get more back for your money through the TT/MGP than any other Government funded event Absolutely no way, in my opinion the cost of the TT to the taxpayer can in no way be recovered through taxes etc. so where is the return? I'm sure if the government published accurate figures the deficit would be huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 You brought up this matter from two years ago in order to discredit me earlier in this thread, but I will stand by and repeat, that I am not a lier. I brought up your motives for joining the forum. You claimed it was at the request of a mod. I may have got hold of the wrong end of the stick - apologies if I have But say I'm sitting in the pub with my mate and we are discussing some issue, say PROWL's take on the footpath issue, with which we both vehemently disagree. My mate says to me "I'm a member of Manx forums (he may or may not be a mod), on which items of interest are discussed. You should give it a try - put your point of view on there to reach a wider audience, there are some lovely people on there" Would this be classed as a request to join the forums to further his own cause? Or is this a complete irrelevance to the case in question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slieau dhoo Posted September 2, 2009 Share Posted September 2, 2009 So, in a nutshell, you are saying that so long as there are tourists and revenue streams, we should accept the deaths that arise as a result? Without compunction. Thats the thin end of a very large wedge.... what im saying is, If people are 100% honest with themselves, i mean 100%, then the whole "competitor death" arguement is merely a smokescreen for their own personal reasons for opposing the event- ie the inconveience, the congestion, the general dislike of bikes, government expenditure on an event that doesnt interest them, people having fun when they are at work etc. Perhaps this is may sound harsh but i fancy its the truth, a truth people are too scared to admit as they fear that their own "selfish reasons" do not carry enough weight to warrant the event to be stopped The death situation is a conveient arguement, as its a morally justifable cause that meets their own selfish(?) reasons for wanting the event to become extinct. As for the tourism revenue- im pointing out that this is merely one of the many opportunity costs of the event being stopped. With regard to ski-ing/mountainering/diving etc, well why isnt this a fair comparison? Alpine countries encourage people to travel to their country to ski just as the IOM encourages proven motorcycle racers to race on the IOM. The difference is, you must have fairly substantial experience and proven ability to compete on the IOM as a motorcycle racer, whereas ANYONE can go ski-ing, in many cases unrestricted and unsupervised. I wonder what the response's the AUstrians would give if it was suggested that their government abandoned ski tourism on grounds of fatal accidents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I object to young men and women being maimed and killed in Afghanistan. The campaign does not affect me in terms of inconveience, the congestion, the general dislike of bikes, government expenditure on an event that doesnt interest them, people having fun when they are at work etc. not exactly matching criteria but the principle is similar. Not fighting that conflict would not impinge on me in anyway. However I still object on moral grounds. Where to from here? Manx government payoff cheques as bribes to anyone 'inconvenienced etc'? Would objections stop if everyone was paid to be a moral whore? I don't think so although I don't doubt some people would be venal enough to accept blood money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee54 Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 This year the TT cost the Government £2.8million to stage. It attracted 35000 visitors, if all them visitor spent £1000 each it would generate £35million into the Manx economy, how many times is the £35mill taxed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 35 - 8 = 27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.