Are we only supposed to comment positively?


Can you not read - " I have no problem with balanced, structured and sensible comments on this." ?


Malcolm.

(14-03-2015, 07:51 PM)Steady the Edward Wrote: I have just one main  worry about all this sell off job in the published statement of what the candidates had to be capable of doing was not only running the races but providing the marshals , now we struggle to get enough local marshals and a lot of local people that used to marshal that don't now blame the way that in their eyes the people at the top waste money  and all sorts of accusations that if I repeated would get me in to trouble , and as I see it will be joined by a lot more people if they think that some none Island billion air is going to be making even more money out of their good will , good will is a very easy thing to loose , and once lost damned hard if not impossible to get back , I just hope and pray this quest for more more more money does not kill off what good will we have left ,

.

Hi Eddie,


I think you've hit the nail on the head in this post.

This is exactly how I feel, I'm happy to marshal now, and don't want or need any recompense etc (as we all know it costs off Island marshals enough to come over anyway), but IMHO I see it as a way of thanking the Isle of Man for putting on such a a great spectacle and allowing me to be part of it.
But, why would I give up my time to make a corporate organisation richer, I don't sit at my desk working for nothing every week, why would I do it sitting up a mountain for two weeks to allow another corporate and their shareholders to take dividends away from the island on the goodwill of the orange army?

Malcom, I can understand you getting tetchy about some of the posts, but my reply was to post #20, not your posts.



Explanation accepted, however if you had identified in your post to #20 that you were actually replying to that post, then there would have been no reason for me to add the comment that I did within your post. Any reply would have been up to the person who made post #20.

There are two  facilities that I have provided that permit you identify that you are replying to a previous post.

The RED reply text at the bottom right hand side of the post that you wish to reply to (which adds your reply into a new post that also includes the text of the post that you are replying to).

And of course the big black button at the bottom of the posts that says New Reply (which makes a new post at the end of the Thread).

You chose the latter, which in this instance created the confusion.

With respect to your post to #20 - My previous comment:-  " I have no problem with balanced, structured and sensible comments on this." - stands.


Malcolm

(16-03-2015, 12:00 PM)c iom tt Wrote: Malcom, I can understand you getting tetchy about some of the posts, but my reply was to post #20, not your posts.



Explanation accepted, however if you had identified in your post to #20 that you were actually replying to that post, then there would have been no reason for me to add the comment that I did within your post. Any reply would have been up to the person who made post #20.

There are two  facilities that I have provided that permit you identify that you are replying to a previous post.

The RED reply text at the bottom right hand side of the post that you wish to reply to (which adds your reply into a new post that also includes the text of the post that you are replying to).

And of course the big black button at the bottom of the posts that says New Reply (which makes a new post at the end of the Thread).

You chose the latter, which in this instance created the confusion.

With respect to your post to #20 - My previous comment:-  " I have no problem with balanced, structured and sensible comments on this." - stands.


Malcolm

Fair comment. I my defense I sometimes use my phone to post. With big fingers and a small screen, I sometimes dont see the hypelinks. If future, I will stick to posting on a P.C.
My bad, it wont happen again.


You caught me on a bad day.

(16-03-2015, 08:18 AM)c iom tt Wrote: Are we only supposed to comment positively?


Can you not read - " I have no problem with balanced, structured and sensible comments on this." ?


Malcolm.

I wasn't going to respond to this because it chooses to miss the point.

In the end Malcolm hot the nail on the head for me. Thanks.

Sam

(16-03-2015, 05:06 AM)Sam Pato Wrote:

(15-03-2015, 10:45 PM)Malcolm Wrote: "highly contentious possibly even libelous,"

Malcolm.

Not to mention sooooooooooooo f*%@# tedious.  Every bl00dy thread for pity's sake!

I dread to think what anyone considering heading to the TT for the first time must think if they logged in here.

It's beyond negative - some of you blokes are borderline nihilists.

Sam

Oh I see. 
balanced, structured and sensible comments

(17-03-2015, 12:15 AM)c iom tt Wrote:

(16-03-2015, 05:06 AM)Sam Pato Wrote:

(15-03-2015, 10:45 PM)Malcolm Wrote: "highly contentious possibly even libelous,"

Malcolm.

Not to mention sooooooooooooo f*%@# tedious.  Every bl00dy thread for pity's sake!

I dread to think what anyone considering heading to the TT for the first time must think if they logged in here.

It's beyond negative - some of you blokes are borderline nihilists.

Sam

Oh I see. 
balanced, structured and sensible comments

For Gods sake let it go.

My comment was made in relation to what was assumed to be your response to what I had posted earlier in relation to the negative and derogatory posts and comments on the Thread topic and not to what you had posted that confusingly was actually intended by you as a reply for Post #20. Any confusion was brought about through you making a one line post with no reference in any way as to the post you were actually replying to.

 In actual fact, the post of Sam,  apart from the disguised profanities, appears acceptable as a reply to what had gone before ( the negative and derogatory posts) and quite possibly could mirror a new members potential impression of the TT and this Forum after reading the leading posts within the Thread. ( My personal opinion).

I have subsequently answered and explained publicly how and why such confusion arose over our respective posts, and how it could have been avoided.

I have already stated publicly that you caught me on a bad day, so I would suggest that you leave it as it stands now, and move on before this situation starts to deteriorate any further.

Malcolm.

'The Isle of Man Government Department of Economic Development has confirmed that it has received a positive response to the initial request for 'Expressions of Interest' for an independent promoter to manage and commercialise the Isle of Man TT Races, Classic TT Races ..'

Whilst I may understand the reasons for commercialisation of the TT Races, I don't like them. Yes, I'm old school and my days have passed. Presumably others will step into my place.
Right, I'm off to find my rose-tinted specs. .........