Corporate Media Manager Stephan Richeux took offence at my quite clear statement that baseball batting someone in the face would be an 'unacceptable reaction' which is slightly bizarre. Does this mean he thinks that it is acceptable?
The point I was making, which I am sure is plain and clear to all lifeforms above the 'drunken amoeba' level is that, after being treated extremely badly in a life/career ruining kind of way, there are good ways of channeling your anger and bad ways. I like to think I've picked the good way. Perhaps Mr Richeux disagrees.
Of course he missed the bit where I was praising a NCC councillor for his frankness and honesty and the bit where I wrote about my own personal experiences, including the hint of an admission that not all of my feelings in response to the way I've been treated have been good but at least I've not been daft enough to act on them and never will. He homed in on an admittedly flippant remark which I used as part of my attempt to make light of the issue. It's a defence tactic I often use when things get a bit heavy.
And it all seemed to go downhill from there, the result being that Richeux makes a total dick of himself. Not a bright thing to do in the world of PR I'd have thought but there you go.
If you cannot see what is wrong with naming someone and considering hitting them in the face with a baseball bat then I think that you should maybe think about getting some help in regards to your mental state. It may be that you are joking in your desire to beat people with things, but even so, it is hardly something to take the moral high ground about and mock someone for believing that it is wrong. And not only that wanting to harm people, naming them is simply inconsiderate of their feelings. No matter what this woman did to you, I hardly think it is worth threats of violence. And as someone supposedly all for freedom of speech and thought, how are your readers supposed to reveal their true feelings in their comments if when you disagree with them you will mock them, belittle their job in the follow up comments then write a further blog post detailing how ignorant you seem to be to the point that you are attempting to make. I will be interested to see how you plan to mock me for providing my opinion. (By the way, you can appear superior to my opinion by being perfectly civil.)
ReplyDeleteSigh.
ReplyDelete1. There wasn't any threat. At all. If you think there was a threat then you can't read.
2. Thank you for the sympathetic remarks about my mental state. You missed the bit about me suffering from depression then? The bit where I admit that bad thoughts occur as a result? The bit where I say that it is unacceptable to act on said bad thoughts and much better to find a constructive way of channeling your anger, like writing a blog?
3. If somebody comes onto my blog and starts telling me what I can and can't write in it they must accept the consequences. The clue is in the word 'my' in front of the word 'blog' here. If that person happens to be a known NCC spin doctor responding during working hours he can expect to receive a particularly robust response.
4. You're in no position to lecture me that naming someone is 'inconsiderate'. This person destroyed my health and my career, I have the medical reports and the employment tribunal decision to prove it, the latter is posted on this blog if you care to look it up. Try a search for TFTT. How dare you try and tell me that is insignificant compared with being inconsiderate of THEIR feelings?
5. You are clearly trying to construct threats and offence when it isn't there. That's usually the behaviour of someone with a hidden agenda. Or perhaps you're being insincere, in which case then you're just not very bright.
Please do feel free to come back, you might learn something.