We do the best we can with the materials provided. I tried washing some three times and it didn't make any difference.
[hr]
Nothing succeeds like a toothless budgie.
Home
TheSinner.net
Washing Machines
36 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Re:
by munchingfoo on Mon Aug 29, 2005 1:25 pm
Quoting Rennie from 13:24, 27th Aug 2005
Well, Andy, I think you'll want to be re-phrasing what you said in the thread above initially, or else it will seem like you're accusing me of theft, especially with the sentence 'pocketing the difference'. I also advise you to do it pretty fucking sharpish.
No, I don't think i will be rephrasing what I said, be it 'fucking sharpish' or otherwise. The sentence, pocketing the difference, was quite clearly a question, not a statement. A simple yes / no would have sufficed. Instead? An angry rant, and why?
As for your allegations, I'm quite pissed off by them. I've explained exactly what happened to the subs previously on here, and as you're perfectly capable of using the Sinner search facility, look for them your fucking self.
There is not a single allegation in my post, infact, there is even a note specifically stating that I did not alledge anything. I merely asked for an explaination. Why the defensive attitude?
[hr]
[s]
My entire life in boolean logic
¬emptyGlass(pint) => drinking(Andy)
emptyGlass(pint) AND ¬stomach(full) => buy(pint)
emptyGlass(pint) AND stomach(full) => buy(vodka)
emptyGlass(vodka) => buy(vodka)
¬emptyGlass(vodka) => drinking(Andy) [/s]
I'm not a large water-dwelling mammal Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis? Did Steve
- munchingfoo
- Moderator
- Posts: 5062
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:09 pm
Re:
by Rennie on Mon Aug 29, 2005 4:48 pm
Andy, stop being so fucking stupid. The following sentence is not a question, it is an allegation.
"How did you keep track of how much money you had collected, spent, and had left? Or did you just spend it on one event then pocket the difference?"
If I said to you, "Did someone give you that car, or did you just steal it?", I would be inferring that you stole the car, or if I said, "Did that girl want to come back with you, or did you have to drug her?", would mean I was inferring that you had drugged a girl. Not nice, is it.
This is in the same way that you are inferring that I stole money, even though it is technically a question, it is clear what the meaning behind it is. If you look up the law on inferring, you'll find I'm right.
Also, as for angry rant, I think you'll find I answered all your questions in your post. Unsurprisingly, I am very pissed off at your cuntish and accusing attitude, that I didn't expect, hence the angry response, not a rant. A rant would be just a stream of abuse, directed at you, which was completely unhelpful.
Making an allegation, and then saying "I'm not making an allegation" is meaningless. You said it, at least have the balls to admit it. As for your yes / no answer, surely from the rest of my post, WHERE I CLEARLY EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE SUBS, you can assume that my answer must be no, because at no point do I say, there was some left, so I pocketed it. Stop being so obtuse and twatlike.
I've given you a few days to change the post, and you clearly aren't going to, so I'll have to take this matter further.
"How did you keep track of how much money you had collected, spent, and had left? Or did you just spend it on one event then pocket the difference?"
If I said to you, "Did someone give you that car, or did you just steal it?", I would be inferring that you stole the car, or if I said, "Did that girl want to come back with you, or did you have to drug her?", would mean I was inferring that you had drugged a girl. Not nice, is it.
This is in the same way that you are inferring that I stole money, even though it is technically a question, it is clear what the meaning behind it is. If you look up the law on inferring, you'll find I'm right.
Also, as for angry rant, I think you'll find I answered all your questions in your post. Unsurprisingly, I am very pissed off at your cuntish and accusing attitude, that I didn't expect, hence the angry response, not a rant. A rant would be just a stream of abuse, directed at you, which was completely unhelpful.
Making an allegation, and then saying "I'm not making an allegation" is meaningless. You said it, at least have the balls to admit it. As for your yes / no answer, surely from the rest of my post, WHERE I CLEARLY EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE SUBS, you can assume that my answer must be no, because at no point do I say, there was some left, so I pocketed it. Stop being so obtuse and twatlike.
I've given you a few days to change the post, and you clearly aren't going to, so I'll have to take this matter further.
-
Rennie
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 1:51 pm
Re:
by munchingfoo on Mon Aug 29, 2005 7:42 pm
Please, I would love for you to take this further Rennie. Surely you could see that a lawyer would laugh at you.
Have you no concept of even the cronological order of events printed on this simple message board?
As for your yes / no answer, surely from the rest of my post, WHERE I CLEARLY EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE SUBS, you can assume that my answer must be no, because at no point do I say, there was some left, so I pocketed it. Stop being so obtuse and twatlike.
I asked the question before your reply, therefore I could not have assumed no. I stated it was a yes no question after your accusation, that I was accusing you, to show that it was not accusing you, merely asking.
You say that the law states that if an inference of accusation can be proved then I would be guilty. Whether or not this is the case, it is quite clear that when I say (not an accusation) then you would have absolutely no chance proving that I was infering it as one.
I really did have much more respect for your ability to form a coherent arguement. Please, feel free to "take it further". I don't think I am the only one that believes you are just being silly.
Just to conclude so you stop being so silly.
Your point.
If an allegation is proved to be inferred then i would be guilty.
In order to prove I had inferred something you would have to show beyond resonable doubt that I had actually meant it.
The fact that i say it is not an accusation pretty much proves that I did NOT infer such a thing.
Please, do you have anything further constructive, or indeed intellegent, to add?
[hr]
[s]
My entire life in boolean logic
¬emptyGlass(pint) => drinking(Andy)
emptyGlass(pint) AND ¬stomach(full) => buy(pint)
emptyGlass(pint) AND stomach(full) => buy(vodka)
emptyGlass(vodka) => buy(vodka)
¬emptyGlass(vodka) => drinking(Andy) [/s]
Have you no concept of even the cronological order of events printed on this simple message board?
As for your yes / no answer, surely from the rest of my post, WHERE I CLEARLY EXPLAIN WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE SUBS, you can assume that my answer must be no, because at no point do I say, there was some left, so I pocketed it. Stop being so obtuse and twatlike.
I asked the question before your reply, therefore I could not have assumed no. I stated it was a yes no question after your accusation, that I was accusing you, to show that it was not accusing you, merely asking.
You say that the law states that if an inference of accusation can be proved then I would be guilty. Whether or not this is the case, it is quite clear that when I say (not an accusation) then you would have absolutely no chance proving that I was infering it as one.
I really did have much more respect for your ability to form a coherent arguement. Please, feel free to "take it further". I don't think I am the only one that believes you are just being silly.
Just to conclude so you stop being so silly.
Your point.
If an allegation is proved to be inferred then i would be guilty.
In order to prove I had inferred something you would have to show beyond resonable doubt that I had actually meant it.
The fact that i say it is not an accusation pretty much proves that I did NOT infer such a thing.
Please, do you have anything further constructive, or indeed intellegent, to add?
[hr]
[s]
My entire life in boolean logic
¬emptyGlass(pint) => drinking(Andy)
emptyGlass(pint) AND ¬stomach(full) => buy(pint)
emptyGlass(pint) AND stomach(full) => buy(vodka)
emptyGlass(vodka) => buy(vodka)
¬emptyGlass(vodka) => drinking(Andy) [/s]
I'm not a large water-dwelling mammal Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis? Did Steve
- munchingfoo
- Moderator
- Posts: 5062
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:09 pm
Re:
by Rennie on Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:56 pm
Look, this is fucking ridiculous. Your post doesn't even make sense.
I never mentioned a lawyer. In actual fact, I meant I would e-mail the admin, and ask him to take down the remarks you made. Why the hell would I get a lawyer?
Andy, you clearly had it in your head that I pocketed the subs, hence you wouldn't have written that sentence, which I found accusatory. End of.
I was actually trying to give you a hand initially in this thread, spending my time writing some information for you that I thought you might find helpful. I'll know in future not to bother. You are clearly a complete idiot.
I never mentioned a lawyer. In actual fact, I meant I would e-mail the admin, and ask him to take down the remarks you made. Why the hell would I get a lawyer?
Andy, you clearly had it in your head that I pocketed the subs, hence you wouldn't have written that sentence, which I found accusatory. End of.
I was actually trying to give you a hand initially in this thread, spending my time writing some information for you that I thought you might find helpful. I'll know in future not to bother. You are clearly a complete idiot.
-
Rennie
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 1:51 pm
Re:
by munchingfoo on Tue Aug 30, 2005 1:03 pm
Quoting Rennie from 00:56, 30th Aug 2005
You are clearly a complete idiot.
Well yes, yes I am, for it was I who resorted to petty insults.
[hr]
[s]
My entire life in boolean logic
¬emptyGlass(pint) => drinking(Andy)
emptyGlass(pint) AND ¬stomach(full) => buy(pint)
emptyGlass(pint) AND stomach(full) => buy(vodka)
emptyGlass(vodka) => buy(vodka)
¬emptyGlass(vodka) => drinking(Andy) [/s]
I'm not a large water-dwelling mammal Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis? Did Steve
- munchingfoo
- Moderator
- Posts: 5062
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:09 pm
Re:
by Prophet Tenebrae on Tue Aug 30, 2005 3:41 pm
Has it occured to you Rennie, that keeping no financial records (something I strongly think should be mandatory for all hall committees and not something to be decided by the senior student) and then becoming extremely defensive about the issue of fraud - which of course cannot be proven one way or another because of a lack of records - is simultaneously pointless and suspicious?
Pointless because there is no evidence that could ever substantiate any real accussations ever leveled against you, suspicious because what does an innocent man have to hide?
It pretty much makes you a hypocrite as well given your obsession with the records for Bigger Brother.
[hr]
IMAGE:www.btinternet.com/~brother.war/white10-2.gif
Pointless because there is no evidence that could ever substantiate any real accussations ever leveled against you, suspicious because what does an innocent man have to hide?
It pretty much makes you a hypocrite as well given your obsession with the records for Bigger Brother.
[hr]
IMAGE:www.btinternet.com/~brother.war/white10-2.gif
-
Prophet Tenebrae
Re:
by Rennie on Tue Aug 30, 2005 5:55 pm
Ten, firstly, I didn't *decide* that the records shouldn't be kept, I decided not to because we didn't have to and we had no reason to distrust anyone in the committee. Secondly, I'm defensive, as I don't like being accused of theft.
I don't see how this can possibly make me a hypocrite, I didn't need to keep records because the committee didn't need to, legally or otherwise. An event that says it will donate all money to charity, and then can't even publish how much it has donated or even if it donated anything is clearly a different matter.
Greyland, that wasn't a petty insult, I actually believe it to be true. You resorted to accusation instead.
I don't see how this can possibly make me a hypocrite, I didn't need to keep records because the committee didn't need to, legally or otherwise. An event that says it will donate all money to charity, and then can't even publish how much it has donated or even if it donated anything is clearly a different matter.
Greyland, that wasn't a petty insult, I actually believe it to be true. You resorted to accusation instead.
-
Rennie
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 1:51 pm
Re:
by White Knight on Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:35 pm
Andy, must admit am glad to see that another Senior Student is adding pressure to ResBus.
Regarding Hall activities generally, we have alot of money this year, if you are interested in allowing some of your students to join in our activities you are welcome, (some cost may be involved but kept low as poss.!) Email me at albanypark@hotmail.com
Also with regards your constitution, I remember talking to Marco B (he helped design it, i think he said when he was DOR) about it when we were looking at ours this year. From memory amending constitutions for you is vy vy difficult. His words i think was to 'keep rennie on a short leash' (no offence alex merely quoting take it up with the man himself)
With regards the whole accounts thing, I thought that it WAS required for all hall committees to be prepared to hand in last years accounts etc to the Union when requested to as requested in having Union affliation in the societies handbook.
Certainly i full heartedly agree with publishing accounts. I like DRA's online website idea and that will be incorporated with Gatty's website this year.
Regarding Hall activities generally, we have alot of money this year, if you are interested in allowing some of your students to join in our activities you are welcome, (some cost may be involved but kept low as poss.!) Email me at albanypark@hotmail.com
Also with regards your constitution, I remember talking to Marco B (he helped design it, i think he said when he was DOR) about it when we were looking at ours this year. From memory amending constitutions for you is vy vy difficult. His words i think was to 'keep rennie on a short leash' (no offence alex merely quoting take it up with the man himself)
With regards the whole accounts thing, I thought that it WAS required for all hall committees to be prepared to hand in last years accounts etc to the Union when requested to as requested in having Union affliation in the societies handbook.
Certainly i full heartedly agree with publishing accounts. I like DRA's online website idea and that will be incorporated with Gatty's website this year.
-
White Knight
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:52 pm
Re:
by Prophet Tenebrae on Tue Aug 30, 2005 7:41 pm
Not wanting to be accused of theft, I'll grant you is a reasonable reaction but while you may not have been required in any way shape or form to record incomings and outgoings, it's at best naive and at worst negligent to just assume you had "no reason to distrust anyone in the committee".
Additionally - you didn't decide records shouldn't be kept... but you did. I don't understand how that works, it seems that you were wholly responsible for the decision not to keep records. That you had made the decision you didn't need to keep records and then berate other people for similar behaviour is not clearly a different matter. A blurred line at best.
Quite frankly, it's this kind of negligence that convinces me that the total autonomy of hall committees needs to be reigned in - by whom, I don't know... I don't think the university is appropriate and while the Union is well meaning, it would just add a layer of bureaucracy and extra hacks... so I guess the system is doomed to what it is in perpetuity and we just have to assume that people that are on committees will be upright and so on.
I have no doubt that the vast majority of people *ARE* honest but the minority that are warrant a system of balances and checks.
[hr]
IMAGE:www.btinternet.com/~brother.war/white10-2.gif
Additionally - you didn't decide records shouldn't be kept... but you did. I don't understand how that works, it seems that you were wholly responsible for the decision not to keep records. That you had made the decision you didn't need to keep records and then berate other people for similar behaviour is not clearly a different matter. A blurred line at best.
Quite frankly, it's this kind of negligence that convinces me that the total autonomy of hall committees needs to be reigned in - by whom, I don't know... I don't think the university is appropriate and while the Union is well meaning, it would just add a layer of bureaucracy and extra hacks... so I guess the system is doomed to what it is in perpetuity and we just have to assume that people that are on committees will be upright and so on.
I have no doubt that the vast majority of people *ARE* honest but the minority that are warrant a system of balances and checks.
[hr]
IMAGE:www.btinternet.com/~brother.war/white10-2.gif
-
Prophet Tenebrae
Re:
by Rennie on Tue Aug 30, 2005 10:45 pm
Well, I did have no reason to distrust anyone in the committee. Also, the money was locked away, and only opened when needed, and we had two locks on the moneybox and no one had both keys. It was minor security, but good enough for a small amount of money.
As for not keeping records, I didn't because I didn't see the point of keeping records of something so petty, and the constitution didn't require us to, so we didn't bother. To be honest, it probably would have taken us about 10 minutes to do with the amount of money we had, but we didn't have to, nor did we see a point in doing it, so we didn't. Convoluted yes, explained fully, hopefully. The committee only had 4 members, so it wasn't as though we had loads of people to distrust.
White Knight. Marco did design our constitution, you're right. He also probably said that, but that's because he knows I don't like him, and he was trying to make things difficult. I'm not sure about union affiliation, or if we ever had it, to be honest.
Publishing accounts is a great idea, and everyone should do it. We didn't because it wasn't required, and we couldn't be arsed for such a petty amount that we quickly spent on food for the BBQ and a few other events.
As for not keeping records, I didn't because I didn't see the point of keeping records of something so petty, and the constitution didn't require us to, so we didn't bother. To be honest, it probably would have taken us about 10 minutes to do with the amount of money we had, but we didn't have to, nor did we see a point in doing it, so we didn't. Convoluted yes, explained fully, hopefully. The committee only had 4 members, so it wasn't as though we had loads of people to distrust.
White Knight. Marco did design our constitution, you're right. He also probably said that, but that's because he knows I don't like him, and he was trying to make things difficult. I'm not sure about union affiliation, or if we ever had it, to be honest.
Publishing accounts is a great idea, and everyone should do it. We didn't because it wasn't required, and we couldn't be arsed for such a petty amount that we quickly spent on food for the BBQ and a few other events.
-
Rennie
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 1:51 pm
Re:
by munchingfoo on Wed Aug 31, 2005 8:16 am
As far as I have been told by DoSD we are not affiliated to the Students Union and as such are not entitled to ask them for any cash.
Maybe they are just being stricter this year. To be affiliated every member of the union must be eligable to join the affiliated group. This is not the case with halls and their committees.
[hr]
[s]
My entire life in boolean logic
¬emptyGlass(pint) => drinking(Andy)
emptyGlass(pint) AND ¬stomach(full) => buy(pint)
emptyGlass(pint) AND stomach(full) => buy(vodka)
emptyGlass(vodka) => buy(vodka)
¬emptyGlass(vodka) => drinking(Andy) [/s]
Maybe they are just being stricter this year. To be affiliated every member of the union must be eligable to join the affiliated group. This is not the case with halls and their committees.
[hr]
[s]
My entire life in boolean logic
¬emptyGlass(pint) => drinking(Andy)
emptyGlass(pint) AND ¬stomach(full) => buy(pint)
emptyGlass(pint) AND stomach(full) => buy(vodka)
emptyGlass(vodka) => buy(vodka)
¬emptyGlass(vodka) => drinking(Andy) [/s]
I'm not a large water-dwelling mammal Where did you get that preposterous hypothesis? Did Steve
- munchingfoo
- Moderator
- Posts: 5062
- Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 2:09 pm
Re:
by White Knight on Wed Aug 31, 2005 11:22 am
Think he probably feared you asking him for money.
But since I am not sure on this have requested info from DOR as since we are allowed seats and votes in SRC etc.
Also Alex, come on, not keeping records is just naive. Would you be happy if you gave your money to a load of students and could not see a paper trail?
And also your answer that you were not specifically needed because of your constitution is taking the rules vy literally and not quite in the spirit of it. (Section 7 a) No one is accusing you of theft but by not keeping records you left yourself open to that. No one thinks you did it was a pissy little BBQ.
It was merely that it was vy naive. So stop being defensive and just admit it would have been better if you had of kept records otherwise things like this would not be coming back to haunt you...
But since I am not sure on this have requested info from DOR as since we are allowed seats and votes in SRC etc.
Also Alex, come on, not keeping records is just naive. Would you be happy if you gave your money to a load of students and could not see a paper trail?
And also your answer that you were not specifically needed because of your constitution is taking the rules vy literally and not quite in the spirit of it. (Section 7 a) No one is accusing you of theft but by not keeping records you left yourself open to that. No one thinks you did it was a pissy little BBQ.
It was merely that it was vy naive. So stop being defensive and just admit it would have been better if you had of kept records otherwise things like this would not be coming back to haunt you...
-
White Knight
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 1:52 pm
Re:
by Rennie on Wed Aug 31, 2005 12:42 pm
I've already said it's a good idea to keep records. Fact is, we couldn't be arsed for the amount we had. We didn't really give a fuck, we ran a few events with the money we had and then it was gone, hopefulyl we made a difference, but I wish we'd never bothered now.
-
Rennie
- Posts: 855
- Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 1:51 pm
Re:
by Dotty on Mon Sep 05, 2005 3:19 pm
Isn't the whole concept of trusting your fellow committee members completely missing the point. I thought accounts were so the committee could be accountable to the folk paying hall subs to them. Who cares if the committee trust each other, the real question is does everyone else trust the committee?
-
Dotty
36 posts
• Page 2 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests