Dignity and Respect at work

suki1964

Deleted%20User wrote: »

Err And let's not forget judging all the human working race. I was pretty sickened by a couple of comments as to how he/she said they didn't believe everybody on here was as hard working in a thread based on frozen shoulder. Totally uncalled for. Who is who to judge. As I believe a certain now ppr'd poster was a big avocet of saying be careful what you post about yourself, sometimes your sang doesn't half slip up! Myself I absolutely couldn't give a monkeys if people have a crack who I am, but sang most certainly should in the professional position claimed!! I notice she is quite selective in what she quotes too.... Perhaps posters can have a request list of just who they don't want a reply from as way forward responding to the level of sarcasm from Sang huh.

You need to get your facts right on that thread and what was said and in what context

Sangie, like myself, explained to another poster how it was impossible to be doing the work the op of that thread was doing with a frozen shoulder. The poster in question was implying that the op was swinging the lead and was perfectly capable of going into work and doing light duties, in an envoiremet where there is no such thing. That particular poster had a habit of implying people were pulling fast ones, even going as far as searching their internet history to prove it

Sangie commented that whilst she was under no illusion that whilst the forums do attract those that want to do as little as possible for as much as possible, that in the case in question, the op had overcome huge personal difficulties it find work and to stay in work and was indeed sincere

Tiddlywinks

OK - this is the relevant bit:

robatwork wrote: »

Are you perhaps in medicine?

sangie595 wrote: »

Perhaps you meant "on" and not "in"?

sangie595 wrote: »

Up until now I have explained that I did not say or mean what SOME people have decided to interpret one sentence as saying.

So, to set the record straight.... what *did* you mean by that throw away line which questioned if the OP was 'on medicine'?

A simple explanation of that comment would put a lid on any further assumptions as to the intent.

I'm struggling to see any relevance or useful application for your suggestion that the OP is 'on medicine'. It certainly didn't assist the OP or answer any of the other posters' questions.

Let's put it this way... if you were in a meeting supporting one of your colleagues and someone else said "perhaps you mean Joe Blogs is on medicine' as a throw away line, I bet you'd feel the need to question the motivation of that comment - particularly where Joe Blogs has not even mentioned anything about medicine in his discussions.

Look, you made a throw away remark, got called out, then tried to cover up with lots of noise.... better to just have said nothing or explained with something like 'sorry about that, I'm less patient at the moment because I'm tired / ill / on meds...' (or whatever).

bugslet

!!!!!!.

I've appreciated both sangie and Tiddlywinks input on/in this board. I've learnt bits from both of you. I've no axe to grind one way or the other, so FWIW.

robatwork made the comment about being in medicine, sangie said presumably you meant on not in. I'm seeing it more as grammar than intention to be rude to the OP. I really CBA thinking about minor stuff and then picking people up on it.

Anyone feel free to pick over what I may or may not mean, why I am/am not right, that's my opinion.

Hope you feel better soon sangie.

AylesburyDuck

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

OK - this is the relevant bit:







So, to set the record straight.... what *did* you mean by that throw away line which questioned if the OP was 'on medicine'?

A simple explanation of that comment would put a lid on any further assumptions as to the intent.

I'm struggling to see any relevance or useful application for your suggestion that the OP is 'on medicine'. It certainly didn't assist the OP or answer any of the other posters' questions.

Let's put it this way... if you were in a meeting supporting one of your colleagues and someone else said "perhaps you mean Joe Blogs is on medicine' as a throw away line, I bet you'd feel the need to question the motivation of that comment - particularly where Joe Blogs has not even mentioned anything about medicine in his discussions.

Look, you made a throw away remark, got called out, then tried to cover up with lots of noise.... better to just have said nothing or explained with something like 'sorry about that, I'm less patient at the moment because I'm tired / ill / on meds...' (or whatever).

But why.......
I'm sorry, but why on earth should they explain further than they have, your really just coming across as a tiny bit precious now, especially as by useing the phrase "got called out" you seem to be assuming your right and they are wrong. Doesnt seem everyone thinks so.
Life doesnt work like that, sorry.

NiallB

martinthebandit wrote: »

I used to but damned if I can remember which Frank Zappa album it was on.

Seeing as this thread is now utterly derailed, it was Bongo Fury and several of the live albums :-)

martinthebandit

NiallB wrote: »

Seeing as this thread is now utterly derailed, it was Bongo Fury and several of the live albums :-)

Thanks, Google had already sorted it but I appreciate the effort.

After reading the 'determined to be offended' wingers on this thread I think it's time for me to take my medicine

xapprenticex

Did somebody say



?

Seriously though, I have no idea what albums you guys are talking about.

martinthebandit

xapprenticex wrote: »

Did somebody say



?

Seriously though, I have no idea what albums you guys are talking about.

Google is your friend and 'Frank Zappa' should be your search term

Detroit

I took Sangie's remark to be a comment on the OPs posting style, which was a little unclear.

I took it to be said in the way a person not making much sence might be asked if they'd had a few drinks.
It was also a play on words from the previous post.

I personally didn't see any link to MH, and am surprised by the strong reactions from those who did. Especially after Sangie explained.

I do think a bit of perspective is called for here. The world is full of injustice and discrimination that is inflicted intentionally, often with devastating effects, on vulnerable people.

From what I gather, Sangie has spent a career helping people fight and challenge just this.

To those who have attacked Sangie for this remark, I would have thought there'd be more important fights and more deserving targets.

xapprenticex

martinthebandit wrote: »

Google is your friend and 'Frank Zappa' should be your search term

Ahh i found it, way before my time. Try 'Aqua - Barbie Girl'. Very catchy.