Same thing. The business decision is prompted by the culture we now live in.

These thoughts are thought all the time and when you look at the policies of establishments they are turned into realities.

Essentially you are arguing for censorship by outcome and its replacement with a form of dishonesty....Anyone who supports this and also criticises 'spin' is a hypocrite...because essentially that's what you create.

I certainly think that this person should have been spoken to about what is appropriate in emails but taking their living away gives out a dysfunctional and extreme message that promotes fear.

I prefer to promote honest dialogue. I don't believe brow-beating people helps in this.

I occasionally brow-beat on here but that's knockabout...I'm not looking to change opinions but advertise an argument. Different non violent opinions and perspectives are more than ok...they are a healthy environment for democracy.

I've kind of gone off the beaten track a bit.....Ah well.....Where's that Duran Duran DVD.

Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Jun 2017 3.53pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I find your tone too forceful and it offends me. If I'm to approve of the society you promote here I think you should be sacked from your job if you communicate like this. You have certainly done that here and again...going along your lines....as you are always a representative of who employs you your forceful forthright non nonsense tone should be culled out of the workforce and society.

Of course I think that is all bollocks but I regard that as the practical outcome of what you are supporting.....This email wasn't meant for the public...so your punters point is misplaced.... and I think the reaction is ridiculous and harmful.

If we are all going to be judged by any comments we make at all times then I don't know of many people who would have a job by the end of the week.

There are three ways to go about this. To push back, acquiesce or to approve.

You certainly don't push back.

Edited by Stirlingsays (30 Jun 2017 5.03pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The debate is about sacking people because of perceived pressure from the puppet masters agenda of identity politics.

Is censorship by outcomes bad then? If so, why? I'm prepared to be won over because you seem like a bright bloke and I wouldn't pretend to be that smart. (And that's not false modesty).

Up to now I would have thought it a good thing to think: I shouldn't say/do this bad thing because there might be a bad outcome for my employer and, by extension, me.

If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.

People operating in a professional capacity, when relating to other organisations in particular, should be careful about what they say and they should have the brains to censor themselves.

It's not a trivial f*** up. That's my take. The severity of the rebuke for failure depends on so many things. None of us has those details at our disposal in this case.

If you want to live in a world full of kindness, respect and love, try to show these qualities.