Black Lives Matter

[geosname]

Am I supposed to ask you questions now?

[geosname]

Just now, WV said:

I'd assume I did. Just like the bonehead who paid for the banner. What's the issue with him being sacked then? 

I don't have one.... do you?

If you make a decision you either suffer the consequences or reap the benefit.

[WV]

1 minute ago, darren1810 said:

The social media aspect intrigues me. Myself i have no interest in sticking a picture of a plate of baked beans or a glass of wine on Facebook or whatever platform.

But from my limited experience of it i know it can prejudice employers views whether rightly or wrongly.

Where i work there was a set of interviews for a High flying position on a six figure salary.

One guy seemed to stand out head and shoulders above the rest and i wasn't alone in that opinion. ( i attended a get together and informal chat with all the candidates ) 

They did their due diligence afterwards which i found strange and he was not considered for the position because of his social media.

His Twitter was full of retweets and on these were a few obscenities. The tweets were mainly anti-brexit and anti-Johnson. He had made no actual obscene comments himself just purely retweeted. 

Now he is still employed at the other employers and they have deemed those tweets okay ( unless they haven't seen them ) , yet a prospective employee felt they were too much.

I'm not sure that sits right with me. 

There are some outrageous things on Twitter and the amount of folk out of work would be astronomical if everyone took action.

 

Perhaps working at a school you should keep political opinions to yourself? What if pupils found his twitter as it clearly wasn't private? I couldnt tell you whether any of my teachers were labour or tory and that's the way it should be. My mum and dad used to refuse to tell me or anyone else which way they voted. They were both teachers. That's the way it should be. 

[WV]

Just now, geosname said:

I don't have one.... do you?

If you make a decision you either suffer the consequences or reap the benefit.

I certainly don't but some bonehead sympathisers on here clearly do.

[geosname]

11 minutes ago, WV said:

Perhaps working at a school you should keep political opinions to yourself? What if pupils found his twitter as it clearly wasn't private? I couldnt tell you whether any of my teachers were labour or tory and that's the way it should be. My mum and dad used to refuse to tell me or anyone else which way they voted. They were both teachers. That's the way it should be. 

I had a mate who was 100% Tory, at the time I was 100% union and Labour, it never came up as a contentious issue. We agreed very early on there were 3 things we would never discuss..... politics..... religion..... personal money.

[geosname]

1 minute ago, Nofinikea said:

Equates to is a lovely way of avoiding the actual question.

 

So explain what "OK" means..... to you.

[Iron Curtain]

19 minutes ago, geosname said:

Am I supposed to ask you questions now?

You can if you like but it won’t add much to the debate I don’t think. I’d just happily give you answers on what I thought was ok or not.

I think we have got to a place where we know that the words on the banner were not racist when taken in complete isolation. 

We know that context is important.

We know that just because something isn’t against the law it may not be ok.

We know it’s down to individual opinion to judge that.

We know that the fool with the banner has been sacked so his employers obviously thought it was.

I fear we may have been arguing the same thing for most of our  lengthy back and forth, but from different perspectives.

 

 

[Iron Curtain]

Coincidentally I have been reflecting on this “the words are not racist” argument.

Remember when Scumbag hardcore racists used to wave bananas at black players?

Now a banana isn’t racist when taken in isolation. In fact they are rather good for you.

But would anyone who yesterday was proclaiming that “the words are not racist” have a view on that? I’d be genuinely interested.

its clear no one on here is going to move from their view, so it’s pointless us all trying to score points against each other... I would love to hear it though as it’s fascinating how different people see things.

[geosname]

6 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

Further to that question.  Ok means what the dictionary says it means, agreeable, etc...

It does not say that ok means "would I do it".....

You are now even trying to redefine the english language to defend your absurd argument about the banner....

Give it up man, you have it wrong,  move on.  

Is the banner ok?   Is not asking would you have done it - that's actually a fact according to the English dictionary.

🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

So if agreeable is your definition of right disagreeable should be your definition of wrong....... so if I thought you were disagreeable you would be wrong and I would be right..... correct?

[geosname]

2 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

Lets play though Geo...

You wouldnt have done the banner.

Why?

Because it's not something I would contemplate doing.... I've already explained..... that's why I wouldn't do it... there is no upside, no gain, no forward movement, no advantage, creates an over complicated situation, waste of money..... enough?

[geosname]

1 minute ago, Nofinikea said:

🤣🤣🤣

Wtf.. try again.

It's the definition you support.

The bloke who flew the banner disagrees with you.... is he right or wrong?

You disagree with the bloke who flew the banner.... are you right or wrong?

[geosname]

1 minute ago, Nofinikea said:

Because it's not something you would contemplate doing.

Because there is no gain, no upside, no forward movement, no advantage, waste of money - ok (dictionary definition of ok).

Creates an over complicated situation.

This I am interested in... 

What over complicated situation does it create if it has not broken any laws?

You don't know?...... jeez 

[geosname]

2 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

I dont have my own definitions.  I tend to use the actual ones that everyone else uses...

Ok means various things Geo, none of which are would you do it...  you can look it up if you want to...  or you can keep arguing about the actual factual definition of words to avoid the issue.

Why avoid the question.... wiggle wiggle

[geosname]

2 minutes ago, Nofinikea said:

Oh I know.  I am asking you directly...

What over complicated situation does it create if no laws are broken?

Are you going to be honest enough to answer or are you just going to keep wiggling and deflecting?

You answer it and I will tell you if I agree

[geosname]

44 minutes ago, Iron Curtain said:

You can if you like but it won’t add much to the debate I don’t think. I’d just happily give you answers on what I thought was ok or not.

I think we have got to a place where we know that the words on the banner were not racist when taken in complete isolation. 

We know that context is important.

We know that just because something isn’t against the law it may not be ok.

We know it’s down to individual opinion to judge that.

We know that the fool with the banner has been sacked so his employers obviously thought it was.

I fear we may have been arguing the same thing for most of our  lengthy back and forth, but from different perspectives.

 

 

I would agree with most of that.