Battlezone Forums

I am not disagreeing with what you said.
In my time working for Xerox we all attended many courses such as first aid and other subjects. One of the courses, that was almost universally derided by most attendees as a total waste of time, was one called "Empowerment". I however thought it was an excellent course and decided to adopt the "yes we can" attitude it was intended to inspire. Probably much to the irritation my department managers, who rather liked their little interdepartmental power games and didn't really want staff who just went round doing stuff they had not been told to do because they knew it needed to be done. But it was precisely this sort of idiocy the course was intended to counter. I took it on board in a big way and would not now consider any other approach to work, If you do your work out of fear of potential consequences then you are already a victim, your own victim.
No doubt many of those working at this care home will ignore their managements cowardly and immoral advice and save lives anyway. I feel sorry for the woman in the story, she has been made into a victim by her management just as they are the victims of the Lawyers and the dead woman a victim of the whole cowardly culture of fear and greed that the law firms and power hungry have produced.
You either stand up for what is right or you become a victim too. Stand proud in court as they try to destroy you. The knowledge that you stood up will make you richer than any of these parasites will ever be. Money is imaginary and so is your Spirit.

It isn't greed when a company doesn't want to be sued out of existence. They are pretty much forced to take up sometimes socially reprehensible policies to legally protect themselves. Hell, it would be greed for them to say "**** you" to their employees job stability and make such legally dangerous decisions.

In addition, anything related to "empowerment" or any other such team building I ave ever done in a workplace always resulting in the team working less optimally, since it tended to dissolve the professional hierarchy and cause personal feelings to interrupt work completion.

We have workers for things because computers and machines cannot yet replace them. Thus, people should when at work get their work done and when at home, do their home things. Compartmentalization between work and home is the most efficient. The exception is with small businesses or tight nit groups, but in these cases trust building exercises still serve only to create an awkward and painful work environment.

Well should their policy of standing back while their customers die, become commonly known and associated with that company, then they will have said "****you" to their employee's job stability. As nobody with a will to live would want to pay them for their "care". No doubt their lawyers are ready with the lawsuits should anyone be brave enough to name them publicly.
Fortunately the litigation culture has not yet achieved such a perverted state of affairs in my own nation.

MrTwosheds wrote:Well should their policy of standing back while their customers die, become commonly known and associated with that company, then they will have said "****you" to their employee's job stability. As nobody with a will to live would want to pay them for their "care". No doubt their lawyers are ready with the lawsuits should anyone be brave enough to name them publicly.
Fortunately the litigation culture has not yet achieved such a perverted state of affairs in my own nation.

You're nation has its own distinctly ridiculous issues, like taking "minority" foster children from their guardians because they discover they are members of the conservative party, etc.

Nielk1 wrote:

MrTwosheds wrote:Well should their policy of standing back while their customers die, become commonly known and associated with that company, then they will have said "****you" to their employee's job stability. As nobody with a will to live would want to pay them for their "care". No doubt their lawyers are ready with the lawsuits should anyone be brave enough to name them publicly.
Fortunately the litigation culture has not yet achieved such a perverted state of affairs in my own nation.

You're nation has its own distinctly ridiculous issues, like taking "minority" foster children from their guardians because they discover they are members of the conservative party, etc.

UKIP, not Conservative. UKIP are one of our more right-wing parties. Further than the Conservatives, but not as far as the BNP.

That said, the move was made by Rotheram District Council, with no backing and without the knowledge of from anybody further up; we don't have any laws or policies that link party membership to fostering, and quite rightly. There's an inquiry going on, but I can't find a recent and reliable source about it.

AHadley wrote:

Nielk1 wrote:

MrTwosheds wrote:Well should their policy of standing back while their customers die, become commonly known and associated with that company, then they will have said "****you" to their employee's job stability. As nobody with a will to live would want to pay them for their "care". No doubt their lawyers are ready with the lawsuits should anyone be brave enough to name them publicly.
Fortunately the litigation culture has not yet achieved such a perverted state of affairs in my own nation.

You're nation has its own distinctly ridiculous issues, like taking "minority" foster children from their guardians because they discover they are members of the conservative party, etc.

UKIP, not Conservative. UKIP are one of our more right-wing parties. Further than the Conservatives, but not as far as the BNP.

That said, the move was made by Rotheram District Council, with no backing and without the knowledge of from anybody further up; we don't have any laws or policies that link party membership to fostering, and quite rightly. There's an inquiry going on, but I can't find a recent and reliable source about it.

I was making one example of 100s. All sorts of crazy things go on there, you know that, you live there. And I looked into that party. It looks like far from all of their members have that extremist view, well at least with regards to that specific aspect, but as usual the views of a subset were attached to the entire body. If you listen to politics here, all Republicans are old white redneck men that hate all other races. Entirely untrue without even historical evidence, unless you go revisionist on our history. To think your nation is any different is silly.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013 ... pastry-gun

Don't crumb me

You're nation has its own distinctly ridiculous issues...

Yes.I found that to be an outrageous politically motivated violation of their rights too. Unfortunately it seems to have taken so long for the story to come to light, that undoing it will probably not be possible now. It was a single isolated incident... as far as we know.
UKIP are not conservatives, they are a single issue anti-EU party who appear to be quite popular. Unfortunately their policies lack any real intelligent constructive coherent idea's, such as exactly how they will prevent our economy from collapsing after we exit the EU single market.

Zenophas wrote:http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013 ... pastry-gun

Don't crumb me

Not only do they want guns to be illegal, they want anything gun shaped to be illegal. Now shut up and go to the nurse's office so they can cut off a some of your hair to use in compulsory, random, inaccurate, and expensive drug testing that could ruin your life with an errant result.

Nothing really new there Nielk1, drug laws have been used to erode away our freedom for years, advances in science were always just going to make it worse. The freedom to live as you are told to live is no freedom at all. Worse than an errant result, this regime of forensic oppression will actually cause terror and paranoia within the education system, nobody will be safe, ex girl friend dumped you? spike her new boyfriends drink with a drip of cocaine solution, and he will soon be out of the picture for good...This is actually a dangerous and divisive assault on the safety and liberty of all.

Guys I really dont want to play moderator here, specialy since I'm not one.
However if you keep discussing articles, could you create a new topic? So far this topic seems to become mostly arguing between 2 people. Nothing wrong with it, but this is not the 'discuss, in length, interesting acticles' thread.

As I mentioned; [me] != moderator & [this] == question

They'll pry my gun-shaped poptart out of my sticky dead hands.

However if you keep discussing articles, could you create a new topic?

Fair point. I kind of like the Article, followed by peoples opinions on it format, but having extended arguments is probably very boring for those not participating.

"Sir, incoming Rick Roll!"

"Quick, take evasive maneuvers and call in the Trololo guy!"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/9 ... anual.html

Good idea, but as with the Geneva convention, it will likelly only be followed by one side and only for as long as that side has other stuff they can damage.
Pretty much like the allies didnt bomb urban areas at the start of the war, and later on levelled entire cities, by mistake or not.