Phoebe Stoves...Outside!

[Rory O'Hare]

Phoebe Stoves… Outside!

I can’t believe having read your comments on another thread that you are as rude and as ignorant as to pass comment on an incident to which you weren’t even party to. Your status as a Board of Ten member is still in its infancy and your career in St Andrews hasn’t even begun – for that reason let me give you some advice. Controversy denotes notoriety, rudeness only idiocy. Burning bridges from such an early stage, especially with people who are potential sources of help and have experience in what you are about to embark on smacks of stupidity. St Andrews is a very small place and ill feeling can last for a long time.

I think it would be wise for you not to rely on the words of others and form your own opinions based upon your own experience. When you are in that position, please feel free to comment on whatever you choose. Until that time, do not make personal comments about people of whom you have heard nothing but the sour mumblings of others.

Regards

Rory O’Hare

[Anon.]

[s]Phoebe Stoves wrote on 10:13, 2nd Nov 2003 (in response to my chiding her for this same thing):

Donald,
Your posts are, of course, correct. I am ignorant to what went on before my arrival, as i was not here. Therefore criticising someone with regards to their ignorance (true or not) was severly misplaced and heightened my own ignorance, as you willingly, but fairly, pointed out.

I do appologise.

Can't we just leave it alone now?

(Hello, Rory, by the way - how are you?)

[Barry Joss]

Oh, puh-lease. Come on now Rory, I caught as muck unjustified flak as anyone in the incident of which we speak, but really, I think we're into the realm of wild over-reaction here. Enough.

[John Stewart]

Yes, but given Rory's relationship with a certain party to this story, it's understandable.

That doesn't mean it's justified. It may be, me thinks, a little overkill...

[David Bean]

To accuse someone of rudeness and stupidity, to make some nonsensical claim as to a certain indefinite level of experience that one must have attained before one earns the right to defend oneself from an attack upon one's position (which is all the aforementioned was doing, when push comes to shove), and - as in the subject of the thread - to make an implied threat, is the most shameful thing I've ever read on this board.

I appeal to the better sentiments of those as disgusted with this thread as am I, not to respond, to treat it with the contempt it deserves, and to let it disappear and die in rightful ignominy.

[Barry Joss]

And you behave as well, Bean! Implied threat? Get a grip. I interpreted that heading as a teacher ordering an errant pupil out of the classroom - a fairly appropriate metaphor. I am not, however, taking sides in this squabble. Now, I think I said this already; but I'll say it again...

E N O U G H !!!!

[well done rory]

Well done Rory.

This house has no confidence in the three new co-options.

Then again, we'd struggle to find anyone to oppose.

I have tremendous respect for David, Peter, Eliot, Darshan, Kirsty and John and Jon (+Derek), however I have to question their judgement in who they have picked to fill the vacancies on the Board.

I must admit that I have only briefly met the three ladies, however their conduct on this board has been awful. I have little confidence in their abilities to effectively manage the society.

PS - In anticipation of Miss Stoves' inevitable "You posted at 21.45 - I can see you weren't at the debate - how dare you comment on any society matters!" argument - I am too ill to do anything but comment on The Sinner.

[John Stewart]

If awful conduct is Ms Jennings having good posters prepared on time and distributed, and linkup e-mails sent out on their most regular basis since Mr Bean was clerk, then god knows what these young ladies are going to have to do to keep you happy.

I'm sure they will shape up to be valuable, active board members. Why not give them time to settle in and judge them then. And if your problem is with the board of ten and the co-option process, then object based on that. This vitriolic, anonymous attack on the new board members is both undesirable and unfair. It is no way to welcome three enthusiastic young ladies who want to work for the benefit of the society, and who would have stood for the positions regardless of selection process.

[Laura]

Thankyou John. As for "unregistered user, well done rory"- why have you posted unregistered?
Aside from that, you can't have much respect and confidence in David, Peter, John, Derek, Jon, Kirsty, Darshan and Eliot if you think their judegement in choosing myself and my colleagues was so terrible.
The fact that you claim to have met myself, Miss Jennings and Miss Stoves only briefly proves that you know very little about us and the way we are doing our jobs, and believe me we are doing our jobs and carrying them out with comittment and enthusiasm. All three of us are passionate about and comitted to this society, and will prove much over the course of the term- I assure you.
You may have found it very disrespectful that certain comments have been made on the Sinner, but all these have been apologised for- that argument was over a long time ago. To quote the legendary Barry Joss- "Enough."
I on the other hand, find it very disrespectful that you would post not only negative but down right offensive comments on this thread that not only condemn myself and the other two new members of the board, but also all the people listed above that you claim to respect, on the basis that they chose us.

[Eliot Wilson]

[s]Unregisted User well done rory wrote on 21:48, 5th Nov 2003:
I have tremendous respect for David, Peter, Eliot...


Thank you, but I'm not actually on the Board of Ten, and therefore had no say over the co-options. As it happens, had I had a say, I'd probably have tended towards election rather than co-option, but it hardly matters now.

[hr]
"In a battle between yourself and the world, back the world." Kafka

[Stuart]

While I agree that some unfortunate remarks were made in the other thread, I do not think it is wise to judge the new board members until they have had a chance to prove themselves.

May I also compliment Miss Jennings on her very informative link-up emails.


[hr]"Even the younger Tory MSPs were unnerved by the boy's enthusiasm." [i] Scotland on Sunday [i]

[Al]

Having posted on the "other" thread and then seen the argument jump over here, I thought I would put jump in here with it. I questioned the wisdom of using co-options to fill three vacancies. I never, however, meant to give the impression I questioned the worth, or motives, of the people co-opted. I am sure they have the best interests of the Board and the Society at heart. Perhaps if they had been elected by the Society has a whole they would not have faced such unnecessary personal attacks. But, this being Debates, I doubt it......

[hr]Life is too important to be taken seriously.

[Tobias Joss]

Legendary? Oh! Thank you, you're much too kind, really!



And, I thought I would allow a debates thread to see the unveiling of my new Hebrew-ified name.

[Eliot Wilson]

I think, Mr. Joss, that your 'legendary' status has long been assured in debating circles in this little ol' town.

[hr]"In a battle between yourself and the world, back the world." Kafka

[Tobias Joss]

But now I may be in danger of crossing the divide into the realms of the merely mythical.

[Eliot Wilson]

Like Brigadoon, you mean?

[hr]"In a battle between yourself and the world, back the world." Kafka

[Tobias Joss]

Except I'm going to show up more often than once a century. Buwahahaha etc.

[exnihilo]

Miss Stoves, I am given to understand that I was rude to you when last I was in St Andrews. I confess not to be able to recall being, but if my words or actions gave offence - I am most heartily sorry.


[hr][i]"Most people are not as stupid as they look; I mean, how could they be?"[i]

[Phoebe Stoves]

Mr. Joss, thank you, but your apology is not required. Mr. Wilson, however, might like to apologise for passing on secrets i tell him while intoxicated with alcohol and numb from cold at four o'clock in the morning. Shame on you, Mr. Wilson! If a lady can't trust the Father of the House, then who can she trust? In fact, you told me that you would not remember a thing about last night, so i hate to think what else you can remember of what i did or said (or sang *cringe*) or indeed who you have told....

Mr. Joss, again, apology not required for the 'incident', however, for reserecting this ghastly thread, perhaps....

[exnihilo]

Yes, that occured to me, but I could think of no more suitable place for an apology, short of starting a new thread devoted to it.


[hr][i]"Most people are not as stupid as they look; I mean, how could they be?"[i]