Problem at work, need some quick advice....

ValHaller

Southend1 wrote: »

Val I don't think he's ever going to give this one up!

Ps- I'm flattered at how many times my post has been quoted in this thread now

The irritating thing is not so much his analysis of the OP's attitude, which is probably not far wrong, but for the fact that he thinks that the OP's attitude makes voiding a principle over touching in the workplace entirely acceptable. However, the principle makes OP's attitude utterly irrelevant to the problem.

goonarmy

ValHaller wrote: »

OP may well have a problem and if he did not have an issue perhaps the touching would be OK. You might call it a dead horse, but the hole you want to pick in the following is that A is not true. And it remains live while you continue to try and pick that hole.

A) unwanted touching is always unacceptable
OPs views on "inferior" people seem to indicate he has a poor attitude towards some coworkers.

Just because may be the case that doesn't mean A) is invalidated.

It does not come clearer than that

By continousy posting this you prove that you havent read the original post, understood the problem or have a valid arguement. Again, repition does not make a point more valid. Sadly yours is now mute. A well thought out arguement would have carried weight your cut n paste silliness does not. Changed a spelling there for southend. Knew you couldnt leave it.:cheekyknowingwink:
Ps do you have asbergers?

Southend1

ValHaller wrote: »

The irritating thing is not so much his analysis of the OP's attitude, which is probably not far wrong, but for the fact that he thinks that the OP's attitude makes voiding a principle over touching in the workplace entirely acceptable. However, the principle makes OP's attitude utterly irrelevant to the problem.

Yes totally agree with you. I came to the conclusion that i was wasting my time trying to discuss this with goon as he/she seems unable or unwilling to respond to the point about unwanted touching never being ok. I also couldn't understand some of his posts due to the typos etc.

As an aside, have you noticed that some people here regularly ask other posters whether they have Aspergers? Not sure why this is or the relevance to what's being discussed.

scooby088

This thread is 9 pages long and about 6 of those are repeating themselves, nothing more constructive has been added.

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

Yes totally agree with you. I came to the conclusion that i was wasting my time trying to discuss this with goon as he/she seems unable or unwilling to respond to the point about unwanted touching never being ok. I also couldn't understand some of his posts due to the typos etc.

As an aside, have you noticed that some people here regularly ask other posters whether they have Aspergers? Not sure why this is or the relevance to what's being discussed.

I think the aspebergers thing is in relation to southend and her posting style. She does seem to be very persistant without havent much subject knowledge, on other threads as well as this. The quesion was asked in this thread early on and ignored.
With regard to my "unwillingness"; have you not read my posts or the ops? If he said the sky was inappropiate would you agree?
The issue from his own posts is his attitude to others. And that is all. From his first post the touching is not the be all and end all, its the existance of a.n.other with the bare faced cheek to act as an authority. He needs help.

RichardD1970

Goonarmy, simple yes or no answer.

Is it OK for the OP's immediate supervisor to

pat(ting) me on the back like a dog

when such physical contact is unwelcome?

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

I think the aspebergers thing is in relation to southend and her posting style. She does seem to be very persistant without havent much subject knowledge, on other threads as well as this. The quesion was asked in this thread early on and ignored.
With regard to my "unwillingness"; have you not read my posts or the ops? If he said the sky was inappropiate would you agree?
The issue from his own posts is his attitude to others. And that is all. From his first post the touching is not the be all and end all, its the existance of a.n.other with the bare faced cheek to act as an authority. He needs help.

1. I am a he, not a she.

2. When did I ever claim to have any subject knowledge at all?

3. Last time I checked, people could be persistent in their belief that unwanted touching in the workplace is wrong, without having Aspergers.

4. Yes I have read ALL the posts on this thread, including yours and OPs

5. The sky has no control over who it touches.

6. OP may indeed need to review his attitude towards his coworkers, however that doesn't mean they have a right to touch him if he doesn't want them to.

7. There are some people on this forum who irritate me from time to time, but I've never felt the need to block anyone before.

8. I will be blocking you.

ValHaller

goonarmy wrote: »

By continousy posting this you prove that you havent read the original post, understood the problem or have a valid arguement. Again, repition does not make a point more valid. Sadly yours is now mute. A well thought out arguement would have carried weight your cut n paste silliness does not. Changed a spelling there for southend. Knew you couldnt leave it.:cheekyknowingwink:
Ps do you have asbergers?

Obviously your understanding of logic and proof is flawed.

Continuous repetition of Southend's statement does not prove that I have not read the original post.

Repetition does not push validity beyond 100%. But bear in mind I repeat it because it is 100% valid, not in order to make it valid.

The argument has already been made, but it seems that you have not read it.

Now, once more

A) unwanted touching is always unacceptable
OPs views on "inferior" people seem to indicate he has a poor attitude towards some coworkers.

Just because may be the case that doesn't mean A) is invalidated.

It does not come clearer than that

goonarmy

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Goonarmy, simple yes or no answer.

Is it OK for the OP's immediate supervisor to when such physical contact is unwelcome?

Poor use of English there. I think you are asking is it ok for the co-worker(not supervisor, READ THE POSTS) to pat the op like a dog. Yes i do. As it hasnt been made clear that this is unacceptable. And the coworkers and op's boss has been seen doing it with a positive response from the op. Therefore it is acceptable until told other wise.
Also the op's opinion on acceptability is skewed. If he said unacceptable cos he's black this woukd be a different thread entirely. And yet its only the breif account of the coworker and his "body language" from the op that we can judge.
So in conclusion; the issue lies with the op. Have you seen the first post?????

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

1. I am a he, not a she.
are you sure?
2. When did I ever claim to have any subject knowledge at all?
you dont have to annocunce it,eg at the start of a post but ifbyou want specifics then the fracking threads are a good start
3. Last time I checked, people could be persistent in their belief that unwanted touching in the workplace is wrong, without having Aspergers.
in what way are the two related? Nobody said that. Also do you have aspergers?

4. Yes I have read ALL the posts on this thread, including yours and OPs
but not understood them, never mind
5. The sky has no control over who it touches.
again focusing on touch when that is NOT the issue. He issue is the op's judgement. Read his other posts in other threads hes better than almost everyone including posters on here, in his eyes.
6. OP may indeed need to review his attitude towards his coworkers, however that doesn't mean they have a right to touch him if he doesn't want them to.no one as far as im aware has said that on this thread. The right to act how you think is appropiate until told otherwise surely exists in a work environment, espcially when replicating he actions of others-in this case a superior therefore further reinforcing its acceptability

7. There are some people on this forum who irritate me from time to time, but I've never felt the need to block anyone before.
extraneous information
8. I will be blocking you.
PLEASE PLESSE DONT!!!!!I BEG YOU! Or maybe i aint bothered in the slightest, you can be dense without my input

Answers in read for the nice lady.