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

ValHaller

Twopints wrote: »

Just to check my understanding,

1. as it hasn't been made clear that the touching is unacceptable, it is therefore acceptable?
2. Then, equally, it hasn't been made clear that the touching is acceptable, therefore it is unacceptable until told otherwise.

HTH. :A

That is about the dilemma of this. The more strongly goon army makes the case for 1, the more clearly 2 has to be stated becasue of the ramifications of 1 being accepted into general thinking.

The status of the touching up to present is somewhat indeterminate, the nearest I can get is

• It is unwanted, by OP's testimony
• It is therefore unacceptable
• The toucher is not yet aware that it is unwanted and unacceptable.

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

Answers in read for the nice lady.

I would suggest the fact that you think calling a man a lady is insulting tells us all we need to know about you.

As I recall, the only time I've ever commented on a fracking post here was when another user with a Southend connection commented that there was a shortage of water in the south east. My response was to post a link to a video of the recent Southend floods. As a joke. I never claimed to know anything about fracking or water reserves. In fact if you look at my previous posts, you will note that I regularly ask other posters to seek professional advice and not to rely on anything I or other posters discuss here.

Out of respect for any users who do have Aspergers, I'm not going to answer your Aspergers question as I suspect you intend to use my response as an insult which is likely to cause offence to others.

I'm glad we both now agree that unwanted touching in the workplace is unacceptable and that OP should ask the toucher not to do it again.

goonarmy

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Wrong again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postscript

Interesting discussion about it here

http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2011917

The word again implies that ive been wrong before. In the context of this thread
That hasnt happend.spelling and grammer mistakes have but i deem them acceptable(see how acceptability is soo subjective? Thus priving me point, thus stuff almost writes its self)

RichardD1970 wrote: »

kow·tow (kou-tou, koutou)
intr.v. kow·towed, kow·tow·ing, kow·tows
1. To kneel and touch the forehead to the ground in expression of deep respect, worship, or submission, as formerly done in China.
2. To show servile deference. See Synonyms at fawn1.
n.
1. The act of kneeling and touching the forehead to the ground.
2. An obsequious act.

Yes thats what i googled too. Sounds like you meant bow down metaphorically, rather than physically. You should have wrote that.

Twopints wrote: »

Just to check my understanding, as it hasn't been made clear that the touching is unacceptable, it is therefore acceptable?

Then, equally, it hasn't been made clear that the touching is acceptable, therefore it is unacceptable until told otherwise.

HTH. :A

Exactly that^.
Buuuuut the act of patting as an action is meant as praise or reasureance and has been seen elswhere in the ops working environment. The action off non verbal communication is comparible to a smile,thumbs up or back to my apple strore post above, high fives-a positive intention even if missplaced. The mind games? Im not convinced they even exist anywherw other than the op's mind.

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

I would suggest the fact that you think calling a man a lady is insulting tells us all we need to know about you.

As I recall, the only time I've ever commented on a fracking post here was when another user with a Southend connection commented that there was a shortage of water in the south east. My response was to post a link to a video of the recent Southend floods. As a joke. I never claimed to know anything about fracking or water reserves. In fact if you look at my previous posts, you will note that I regularly ask other posters to seek professional advice and not to rely on anything I or other posters discuss here.

Out of respect for any users who do have Aspergers, I'm not going to answer your Aspergers question as I suspect you intend to use my response as an insult which is likely to cause offence to others.

I'm glad we both now agree that unwanted touching in the workplace is unacceptable and that OP should ask the toucher not to do it again.

So im not on your ignore list? Lot of that about.
You come across to me as a pub know it all, convinced but not educated on matters that they are so adament about. But thats my perception, which is soooo subjective;)
And we never disagreed regarding the asking. We may disagree about if its is acceptable or not.
And insults regarding aspergers say alot about you, how dare you refer to that condition as an insult? People with the condition will not appriciate it. Im tempted to report this.

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

Buuuuut the act of patting as an action is meant as praise or reasureance and has been seen elswhere in the ops working environment. The action off non verbal communication is comparible to a smile,thumbs up or back to my apple strore post above, high fives-a positive intention even if missplaced. The mind games? Im not convinced they even exist anywherw other than the op's mind.

You shouldn't make assumptions about other people's intentions.

The patting could well be meant in a positive way. Equally it could be done in a condescending way. Only the patter knows. All that matters is the OP doesn't want to be patted by this person. Therefore the patting is wrong and OP should ask for it to stop.

ValHaller

goonarmy wrote: »

Twopints wrote: »

Just to check my understanding, as it hasn't been made clear that the touching is unacceptable, it is therefore acceptable?

Then, equally, it hasn't been made clear that the touching is acceptable, therefore it is unacceptable until told otherwise.

HTH. :A

Exactly that^.

(My bolding)

All fires extinguished.

Southend1

goonarmy wrote: »

So im not on your ignore list? Lot of that about.
You come across to me as a pub know it all, convinced but not educated on matters that they are so adament about. But thats my perception, which is soooo subjective;)

Again, making assumptions. You know nothing about my background, education or career. But I have never claimed to be an expert on this subject. I'm just here for discussion.

I won't say what you come across as, because that would be rude.

Southend1

ValHaller wrote: »

(My bolding)

All fires extinguished.

Hallelujah!

Perhaps this thread can be laid to rest now

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

You shouldn't make assumptions about other people's intentions.

The patting could well be meant in a positive way. Equally it could be done in a condescending way. Only the patter knows. All that matters is the OP doesn't want to be patted by this person. Therefore the patting is wrong and OP should ask for it to stop.

But all the evidence is to the contary until clarified by the op. Positive body language such as smiling etc is probably well intended as by its nature. So it wont be wrong until told its wrong. Ie its positive therefore should be perceived as such by all. The op telling the coworker this is not the case will more than likely clear the touching issue up but id be surpised if it stops the "posturing" and percived condensention as the problem lies with the op who consicuous by his absence of futher posts.

goonarmy

Southend1 wrote: »

Again, making assumptions. You know nothing about my background, education or career. But I have never claimed to be an expert on this subject. I'm just here for discussion.

I won't say what you come across as, because that would be rude.

And it would be water off a ducks back regardless. I make no assumptons of anything other than your posts on here. Why would you assume otherwise? Cant rember commenting on your career successes or failings-they are of no interest to me.