Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I had a post reported and removed because it started with FFS.


FFS!


Is this really so offensive?


Plus, is it OK for somebody to behave badly towards someone else on the forum, but not OK for somebody else (me in this case) to object to that behaviour?


This is a serious question, as there seems to be some inconsistency here.


Now I'll wait for somebody to report this. 🙄

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/275283-forum-decorum/
Share on other sites

Worried if you are starting to have your posts removed Sue - in the offensive stakes I think you are pretty low down. I throw the odd 'suggestive' word in which I think is fine in a light hearted way, but at times you just have to respond in the way that you did to something ridiculous. But I have been 'told off' by amin and did have some stuff removed which I didn't think was an issue. In his/her defence admin is generally light touch and also there are always the dangers of defamation on social media platforms. I'll see you when tea's ready (sorry an awful adolescent phrase from long ago that I'd never use on this site, and not aimed at anyone)

Administrator Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It's more about wading in with an FFS opinion

> about a for sale item. It's not necessary to join

> in.



I waded in because the person selling the item has identified and defamed a well known local business person, and those posts have been allowed to stay on the thread, but my post objecting to his or her behaviour was removed


And the person who reported it specifically said he had done it because I "swore" at the OP


The person in question said she had already apologised to him, but still he named her, and had apparently also sent her a very rude message.


As I said, apparent inconsistency in who is considered to be at fault here.


And I thought I had made some valid and relevant points eg that it was a good idea to take mobile numbers of people coming to collect an item, and also that there might be very good reasons why someone was unable to come or let the seller know, eg illness.


But I must admit, people who say "no time wasters" do put my back up. I once came upon someone who used this term about anybody who came to look at an item and then didn't buy it 🙄

ken78 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> why did sue swear and say it was something else

> did she think we don't know what it meant like we

> are thick ?? i don't know any one know



Ken78, as it was you who reported me to admin and accused me of bullying, I think you've got quite a cheek to post on this thread.


Surely everybody knows what FFS means. It's a very commonly used expression of exasperation.


I feel like using it right now.

In a previous job, I got summoned to the big boss's office got a bollocking for using the word 'bollocks' in a message to a colleague when referring to my thoughts on something that someone at another organisation had said publically (the colleague didn't complain, it was IT/Big brother who raised it)


At first, I thought the big boss was joking when he said 'can you explain why you have been swearing on company IT systems?'


I responded by saying I didn't think 'bollocks' was a swear word...as it was openly used in a Newcastle Brown ale advert in the US and Australia....he didn't seem to have any sense of humour or sense of embarrassment that he 'had to say something' as it had been raised in the internal system.


Maybe it's becuase I didn't grow up in this country (as it is a distinctly British expression) and perhaps it's more offensive than I realise?


I think FFS falls very much into a similar bucket....

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In a previous job, I got summoned to the big

> boss's office got a bollocking for using the word

> 'bollocks' in a message to a colleague when

> referring to my thoughts on something that someone

> at another organisation had said publically (the

> colleague didn't complain, it was IT/Big brother

> who raised it)

>


So when a shiny new IT system to check words in emails comes in the system should be built according to company requirements in consultation with management, NOT the company modifying it's beliefs and systems to fit in with the IT system they brought off the shelf.


But thats what tends to happen and then the company finds itself restricted by the system developer in what it can say :). We'll all be sending identical emails before you know it.

So when a shiny new IT system to check words in emails comes in the system should be built according to company requirements in consultation with management, NOT the company modifying it's beliefs and systems to fit in with the IT system they brought off the shelf.


But thats what tends to happen and then the company finds itself restricted by the system developer in what it can say smiling smiley. We'll all be sending identical emails before you know it.

TheCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> In a previous job, I got summoned to the big

> boss's office got a bollocking for using the word

> 'bollocks' in a message to a colleague when

> referring to my thoughts on something that someone

> at another organisation had said publically (the

> colleague didn't complain, it was IT/Big brother

> who raised it)

>

> At first, I thought the big boss was joking when

> he said 'can you explain why you have been

> swearing on company IT systems?'

>

> I responded by saying I didn't think 'bollocks'

> was a swear word...as it was openly used in a

> Newcastle Brown ale advert in the US and

> Australia....he didn't seem to have any sense of

> humour or sense of embarrassment that he 'had to

> say something' as it had been raised in the

> internal system.

>

> Maybe it's becuase I didn't grow up in this

> country (as it is a distinctly British expression)

> and perhaps it's more offensive than I realise?

>

> I think FFS falls very much into a similar

> bucket....



See, TORY PARTY HQ writ large

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thanks for that - none  of mine  have been Mordena - whilst vulnerable cat, think I will just take my chances… Will be having flu though - certainly not by choice - much prefer not to but in vulnerable group.. Avoided them until last year…. Luck of drawer if you are as sick as fog  or just sore arm … assume - god knows - that flu jab is same throughout country.       
    • Wow, that is what it costs for one prisoner. So they get full board and lodging, 24 hour  monitoring  in over populated prison, we are led to believe, minimum exercise, assume a tv in each cell provided - in USA it is together with wash hand basin and c toilet - some have showers as well.   Clearly this amount of money takes  into account overstretched and overworked prison officers, protection for them, counselling which is, in my opinion a bare minimum dealing with prisoners in all settings. Do if Sweden can look outside the box, why can’t we? Or are we just not bothered at all / read statistics some where that reoffending is normal and to be frank, with economy as it is at the moment re employment, cost of living and homelessness..not surprised they reoffend to get back inside - food provided, roof over your head - much better than street living, mixing with wrong crowd, trying to get roof over your head, find a job where 90 % won’t employ you as been inside..
    • @beansprout The Swedes seem to have a useful strategy with regard to offenders  which has reduced repeat offending.  I agree that prison time for minor offences is a complete waste of time. Even worse is that prisons are "colleges of crime" where inmates learn about how to be do crimes and worst of all, become exposed to drug taking. I wouldn't advocate having chain gangs as in the USA but some strategy for getting them into say manual work under supervision might be useful - especially if it came with a modest wag. This would be significantly cheaper than the ÂŁ51,100 it costs per year for  keeping one in jail.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...