More uselessness from DBC

[Amadeus]

3 minutes ago, Themis said:

It's great to see a different perspective on this echo chamber - your anger is fully justified.

I arrived on the island in 2007, to help develop a business. At one point we helped support a film project and invited some established American film people over to help out. At one of our meetings a well-known, and decent, Manx character introduced himself and said 'Welcome to the World's most corrupt non-banana republic" to our US guests. My experience on the island at that time had only been positive so I wondered about the veracity of what he said to us. In the subsequent years I have come to fully understand and have been regularly surprised, sometimes shocked at how bent this little island is. In addition to the obvious nepotism, incompetence etc that you point to of course. Grotesque would be one word one could use, there are of course several others.

I do not know about the facts behind your feelings, but am sure that in some respects you are spot on. You are also right that many, perhaps most, of the stooges on, and moderating, this forum are simply more of the same. Ignore them. Many more read what is said but know better than to get involved. Sadly I suspect Happier Diner is correct - it is not that the ratepayers of Douglas don't care simply that they/we have been ground down by years of incompetence and, likely, corruption - certainly pathetic empire building. Anger is an absolutely appropriate response.. 

 

 

 

It always amazes me how much people read into things. At least you have a vivid imagination. 

[Jarndyce]

1 hour ago, Reportage said:

So says another chirping forum windbag parroting what this forums admins would like to portray. That’s what you get when an unelected local Cllr who is a serial abuser of media and social media for his own ends gets to run his own little anonymous news empire. The fact is that Douglas Council has lied, has been dismissive, and simply failed to engage with the public they are supposed to represent. It’s also becoming very clear also how this Cllr uses social media to provide a completely illusory slant on the basic incompetence of himself and other councilors who seem to think that they are totally unaccountable to anyone. I suppose though that’s completely understandable when nobody actually voted for them anyway. Why should they be accountable to people who they didn’t need the votes of anyway to get into council? As most people in Douglas know they’ll be handing out Cllr jobs in Christmas crackers soon. It’s a shame that people who have no public mandate at all can be so staggeringly confrontational and arrogant when cornered when they have no moral authority to even be standing on the platform they have. 

This style of rhetoric is very familiar - I’ve been trying to place it.

I think it’s a political Twitter-bot (extreme right or left - doesn’t matter), programmed to be confrontational.

is Reportage real?

[Weliveinhope]

4 minutes ago, Themis said:

It's great to see a different perspective on this echo chamber - your anger is fully justified.

I arrived on the island in 2007, to help develop a business. At one point we helped support a film project and invited some established American film people over to help out. At one of our meetings a well-known, and decent, Manx character introduced himself and said 'Welcome to the World's most corrupt non-banana republic" to our US guests. My experience on the island at that time had only been positive so I wondered about the veracity of what he said to us. In the subsequent years I have come to fully understand and have been regularly surprised, sometimes shocked at how bent this little island is. In addition to the obvious nepotism, incompetence etc that you point to of course. Grotesque would be one word one could use, there are of course several others.

I do not know about the facts behind your feelings, but am sure that in some respects you are spot on. You are also right that many, perhaps most, of the stooges on, and moderating, this forum are simply more of the same. Ignore them. Many more read what is said but know better than to get involved. Sadly I suspect Happier Diner is correct - it is not that the ratepayers of Douglas don't care simply that they/we have been ground down by years of incompetence and, likely, corruption - certainly pathetic empire building. Anger is an absolutely appropriate response.. 

 

 

 

The problem being that when he (you?) spouts his conspiracy theory tripe he loses any credibility that he may have once had. I'm sure a large precentage of us on here are equally as frustrated with the way the island has been managed over (probably) decades, and yes you do become apathetic as the years roll on. Being adults and having an adult conversation is one thing, but resorting to personal insults and wild accusations is another. Its about rubbish collection ffs not the state of the health service. Apply a bit of perspective, and if someone has a different view from yourself, accept it and think about why they do and their reasoning. Youre certainly not doing yourself any favours, infact youre probably being trolled now by most people on here whether they agree with you or not. Life's too short, there are plenty more pressing issues to be concerned with, so please, chill out or fuck off.

[Themis]

It would be fair to put my own flag in the ground

My own, extensive, experience is that the Isle of Man is corrupt and/or incompetent, from the top to the bottom. I am in little doubt that much of this is by design. The story is virtually identical in other British islands so one inevitably concludes that is how Whitehall wants it.

It is fair to recognise that, in this case, local councillors do not get paid. The posts are then only attractive to well-meaning people, some of whom may or may not be as competent as experienced professionals might be, or to those seeking a little power. It is these latter types who generally do the most damage and sadly, perhaps tragically would be a better word, the island's structures is littered with them. There is no hope whilst that pattern continues. Which is surely exactly what the mandarins, or whatever they are, in the UK want.

Let's be frank. The Isle of Man may well be a pleasant little place, at least in some respects, but it is a 'postage stamp'. The systems and structures that have been established to 'manage' it are laughable. Or at least would be if they were not so grotesque. And useless. And expensive. Every aspect of the entire island could easily be run by a single CEO with a decent management structure. Probably at something well below half the current costs. Likely less. Yet another £250k KPMG report is not needed to work that out.

Arguing about the pathetic ineptitude of DBC - insert virtually every other aspect of the IoM - is simply rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. As any intelligent observer knows. Which is why they don't get involved.

 

 

[Declan]

1 hour ago, Reportage said:

So says another chirping forum windbag parroting what this forums admins would like to portray. That’s what you get when an unelected local Cllr who is a serial abuser of media and social media for his own ends gets to run his own little anonymous news empire. 

It's interesting that you are alleging the forum is being run to further DBC's agenda. In a thread called More Uselessness From DBC, where various Councillors have been called all sorts. A thread where you've made unsubstantiated and libelous allegations about a named member of the public because you don't like his views on bin collection and the coincidence of his surname.

Yet you've received no warning, editing or ban from the mods. I think if you behaved like you have on any other subject you'd have faced moderation action and it's only Amadeus's duel position as mod / Councillor and the desire to avoid the challenge of bias that's preventing action in this issue. 

Which I suppose raises the question is Amadeus's position as mod compatible with his active political role? I suppose that's for the site ownership to decide and members have to decide whether they want to continue posting or not. Worth asking though!

 

[paswt]

14 hours ago, Tailless said:

You know those gulls everyone loves to hate?  Well they keep the longtail population well under control so little danger of it becoming a major problem anytime soon.

Perhaps but as rodents are primarily nocturnal  I suspect the brown 'long tail' that was attacked and consumed by a gull (I've  seen them consume  dead long tail's) may have  been disorientated as a result of being poisoned by 'Warfarin". I've culled  quite a few staggering aimlessly around my property  .

I   bait for long tails (in Onchan) as there is a resident population , perhaps encouraged by the gulls on the cliffs   (the peregrine falcons/kestrels/sparrow hawks may help by taking a few chicks).

I have no desire to enter the "bin debate" as frankly it's all a bit pointless , as I find the predictable gratuitous insults from  'forum experts' a bit tedious .

 

[Amadeus]

18 minutes ago, Declan said:

It's interesting that you are alleging the forum is being run to further DBC's agenda. In a thread called More Uselessness From DBC, where various Councillors have been called all sorts. A thread where you've made unsubstantiated and libelous allegations about a named member of the public because you don't like his views on bin collection and the coincidence of his surname.

Yet you've received no warning, editing or ban from the mods. I think if you behaved like you have on any other subject you'd have faced moderation action and it's only Amadeus's duel position as mod / Councillor and the desire to avoid the challenge of bias that's preventing action in this issue. 

Which I suppose raises the question is Amadeus's position as mod compatible with his active political role? I suppose that's for the site ownership to decide and members have to decide whether they want to continue posting or not. Worth asking though!

 

My threshold for tolerating abuse is probably higher than that of many others, mainly because my time is too valuable to waste much of it on people like him. You wanna rant against me, go right ahead. And ultimately he’s digging his own hole and destroying any credibility he may have had by doing so. People in his position often don’t realise that.
 

Of course there is a line somewhere but I’d say it’s more a legal one than anything else. I can’t remember the last time I warned or banned anyone apart from spam accounts. Also remember that we act on reports, so if someone reported a breach of the site terms etc it would be reviewed. Ultimately it’s a private website and people need to remember that. 

[Happier diner]

12 minutes ago, offshoremanxman said:

Ultimately that’s probably quite a clever tactic goading a mod who is clearly totally conflicted into issuing a ban knowing that the minute a ban is issued the mod loses all credibility and proves exactly one of the points being made about control of social media.

Posters are warned/banned if they break the rules and not for pissing off the mods.

Must be tempting to hit the 'ban' button though😆 

[Happier diner]

3 minutes ago, Amadeus said:

My threshold for tolerating abuse is probably higher than that of many others, mainly because my time is too valuable to waste much of it on people like him. You wanna rant against me, go right ahead. And ultimately he’s digging his own hole and destroying any credibility he may have had by doing so. People in his position often don’t realise that.
 

Of course there is a line somewhere but I’d say it’s more a legal one than anything else. I can’t remember the last time I warned or banned anyone apart from spam accounts. Also remember that we act on reports, so if someone reported a breach of the site terms etc it would be reviewed. Ultimately it’s a private website and people need to remember that. 

IMO this rule is being broken everytime a certain poster writes something. Now where is that report button?

Do not post material which is offensive or defamatory of anyone else

[Declan]

6 minutes ago, Amadeus said:

Of course there is a line somewhere but I’d say it’s more a legal one than anything else. I can’t remember the last time I warned or banned anyone apart from spam accounts. 

Maybe you don't, and I agree warning and banning must be used sparingly, but moderation decisions are seen as collective and recently there have been many bans for little more than bickering. But then that approach might have recently changed...

[Themis]

10 minutes ago, Weliveinhope said:

The problem being that when he (you?) spouts his conspiracy theory tripe he loses any credibility that he may have once had. I'm sure a large precentage of us on here are equally as frustrated with the way the island has been managed over (probably) decades, and yes you do become apathetic as the years roll on. Being adults and having an adult conversation is one thing, but resorting to personal insults and wild accusations is another. Its about rubbish collection ffs not the state of the health service. Apply a bit of perspective, and if someone has a different view from yourself, accept it and think about why they do and their reasoning. Youre certainly not doing yourself any favours, infact youre probably being trolled now by most people on here whether they agree with you or not. Life's too short, there are plenty more pressing issues to be concerned with, so please, chill out or fuck off.

I endorse and understand your perspective. I am not Reportage and agree that abuse or non-factual evidence does not help credibility. As you say though, there is much to be angry about so venting is understandable, and we're usually not accurate when we do so. Shutting down people who choose/need to do so isn't helpful either - we all need to be heard. And you are right that there are other pressing issues. Sadly they are all being engaged with in the same incompetent, or worse, way.

[Themis]

43 minutes ago, paswt said:

Perhaps but as rodents are primarily nocturnal  I suspect the brown 'long tail' that was attacked and consumed by a gull (I've  seen them consume  dead long tail's) may have  been disorientated as a result of being poisoned by 'Warfarin". I've culled  quite a few staggering aimlessly around my property  .

I   bait for long tails (in Onchan) as there is a resident population , perhaps encouraged by the gulls on the cliffs   (the peregrine falcons/kestrels/sparrow hawks may help by taking a few chicks).

I have no desire to enter the "bin debate" as frankly it's all a bit pointless , as I find the predictable gratuitous insults from  'forum experts' a bit tedious .

 

I for one would love to see people such as yourself put forward a perspective. The 'forum experts' are indeed tedious, not to mention regularly abusive and usually bullying (isn't that now a criminal offence?) - their intention appears typically to stifle any viewpoint that differs from their own/the mainstream. I encourage you, and any other lurkers/observers to please weigh-in

[Reportage]

17 minutes ago, Themis said:

I endorse and understand your perspective. I am not Reportage and agree that abuse or non-factual evidence does not help credibility. 

It’s only their claim of non factual information. Wells lives in Saddlestone if it isn’t in Braddan then it’s on the outer, outer boundary of Douglas North and effectively Braddan for all intents of purposes. It’s a pedants point part of the estate is Braddan some of it Douglas. There is a familial link to the Council CEO that the papers would be well advised to look at. And Wells did totally get shown her arse at the meeting where at least 80 people (and probably more) were almost 100% (literally within 2 people) not in support of the measures at a public show of hands. And ALL Cllrs in the audience (plus the stooge), including Amadeus himself, did hilariously put their hands up in support of their own policy.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Reportage

[Passing Time]

Just now, Reportage said:

It’s only their claim of non factual information. Wells lives in Saddlestone if it isn’t in Braddan then it’s on the outer, outer boundary of Douglas North and effectively Braddan for all intents of purposes. It’s a pedants point. There is a familial link to the Council CEO that the papers would be well advised to look at. And Wells did get shown her arse at the meeting where at least 80 people (and probably more) we’re almost 100% (literally within 2 people) not in support of the measures at a show of hands. And ALL Cllrs in the audience (plus the stooge), including Amadeus himself, did put their hilariously hands up in support of their own policy.

Dear god, just stop will you. Nobody is in the least bit interest in your rantings

[Reportage]

1 minute ago, Passing Time said:

Dear god, just stop will you. Nobody is in the least bit interest in your rantings

Why did you reply then if you’re not the least bit interested?