More uselessness from DBC

[WTF]

22 minutes ago, Amadeus said:

I don’t know anything about her employer but I do know that posts like that are unacceptable. Do you actually think before you post? I know it’s a favourite pastime to attack anything and anyone DBC, but please engage your brain once in a while and consider the possible consequences on a personal and professional level before posting things like that. You have absolutely zero rights to post malicious rumours about a person’s day job. None. And it leaves you open to teal life legal consequences. So if you have a brain, start using it. 

albert will be along to back you up soon, cant have DBC people getting grief can we.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, MrGarrison said:

Amadeus challenged yet ‘Satan’ replies 😂 No heard it straight from the horses mouth. No way they will be allowed to have any direct reports again. Total aggressive fruit loop. Now dumped on DBC who I would guess takes 10 years to decide on anything (like if building controllers are bent or not). 

 

2 minutes ago, MrGarrison said:

Amadeus challenged yet ‘Satan’ replies 😂 No heard it straight from the horses mouth. No way they will be allowed to have any direct reports again. Total aggressive fruit loop. Now dumped on DBC who I would guess takes 10 years to decide on anything (like if building controllers are bent or not). 

Which horses mouth? 
 

[Guest]

Just now, Satan666 said:

 

Which horses mouth? 
 

I’m intrigued now Andy, love to see this proof

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Unfortunately the law doesn't work like that.  It's not for other people to have to prove you wrong, the onus is on you to prove that you are right.

He’s like a kid who’s spat all his dummies out all over the floor.🤣 is this how is fixed DBC equipment?

[MrGarrison]

Just now, Satan666 said:

Which horses mouth? 

Accurate information. She’s hardly the most popular person at work. 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, MrGarrison said:

Accurate information. She’s hardly the most popular person at work. 

From where and who? 

[Gladys]

Just now, MrGarrison said:

Accurate information. She’s hardly the most popular person at work. 

You 'believe' that this is "apparently' the situation. 

In other words you have been told this or have added a fews things together to come up with your view.  Unless you actually work with her and have access to the real information you know nothing.  

[MrGarrison]

3 minutes ago, Satan666 said:

From where and who? 

You’ll have to try harder than that. It’s funny how genuinely putrid untouchable people in the private sector manage to Segway into government roles where they will be protected by failed HR policies like all the other failures. 

Edited February 15, 2023 by MrGarrison

[MrGarrison]

2 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Unless you actually work with her and have access to the real information you know nothing.  

😉

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, MrGarrison said:

You’ll have to try harder than that. It’s funny how genuinely putrid untouchable people in the private sector manage to Segway into government roles where they will be protected by failed HR policies like all the other failures. 

Okay but I’m asking you who and where from have you been told this. Don’t skirt around the issue

[MrGarrison]

2 minutes ago, Satan666 said:

Okay but I’m asking you who and where from have you been told this. Don’t skirt around the issue

I’m in there every day. Hideous. So much management time wasted on someone who should just be shown the door. 

[NoTailT]

3 minutes ago, Satan666 said:

Okay but I’m asking you who and where from have you been told this. Don’t skirt around the issue

Worse case scenario it's down to a court of law to determine, not court of ManxForums on behalf of DBC as has often been the case.

Too much shit getting hidden around here and people getting banned because SOMEONE MIGHT do something about something posted, particularly when it scrutinises DBC or its people.

As I've seen said here often before, it's perfectly ok to haul abuse at Rob C and others when it suits the forum.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

Worse case scenario it's down to a court of law to determine, not court of ManxForums on behalf of DBC as has often been the case.

Too much shit getting hidden around here and people getting banned because SOMEONE MIGHT do something about something posted, particularly when it scrutinises DBC or its people.

As I've seen said here often before, it's perfectly ok to haul abuse at Rob C and others when it suits the forum.

None of it is right. You can’t spout off on the e back of what you just make up. It’s laughable. First he heard it from a good source, now he goes in there regularly. 
you’re right no one should be ridiculed without the proof. For the record I have no affiliation with DBC but just can’t stand the bullsh**.

[NoTailT]

1 minute ago, Satan666 said:

None of it is right. You can’t spout off on the e back of what you just make up. It’s laughable. First he heard it from a good source, now he goes in there regularly. 
you’re right no one should be ridiculed without the proof. For the record I have no affiliation with DBC but just can’t stand the bullsh**.

My biggest frustration is that all this personal dagger nonsense just leads to arguments/debates that lead to distracting from they key issues;

Bins

Corruption

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

My biggest frustration is that all this personal dagger nonsense just leads to arguments/debates that lead to distracting from they key issues;

Bins

Corruption

Okay but he makes it personal to someone else but has no evidence. It’s just crap and yes you’re right it does distract from genuine concerns. Still waiting for his proof.