onewheeldave

Trouble is the Star seems to employ idiots

 

I'm sure there are idiots in every job in every company and to generalise that the Star employs idiots is totally wrong.

In fairness, one of them (whitely) has posted multiple times on this thread stating very clearly that he/she and several collegues all oppose the stars policy on this and have repeatedly complained to the managers.

I think that deserves some credit, and, I wish some poeple one these threads would take the time to read them before posting knee-jerk insults.

I have been called both. One person said the Star employs idiots, as I work for Sheffield Newspaper, that must include me and another one said the git on BMDs, as I said that could quite easily have been me.

Might be worth, as others have suggested, pointing your managers to this thread?

As long as you're sure it won't bring down trouble from them.

I am guessing then that you are of an older generation.

 

I never read local newspapers and only read national newspapers when on public transport. The two most recent deaths that have effected me (both of them friends) I have learnt about via facebook. This may seem alien to older people, but is it really any less personal than a message in a shabby newspaper like the star??

 

Both funeral arrangements were spread on facebook, allowing everyone who cared for the people to be involved in a way that wasn't possible before social networking. As said above it is only the current older generation who will post notices like this really, if I die at an old age (im 25 now) I VERY much doubt that the death of myself or my peers will be communicated by the printed word.

 

Condolences for your loss OP. My mother died some years back and we were charged from every direction, it can come as a real surprise.

One advantage in passing the news on via email/facebook, is that you have control over how you do it- you don't for example, have to insert a compulsory rose.

This is a PR disaster. The Star should just say:

The minimum charge for a death notice is £20 and then so much per line. By the way there is a rose symbol included, do you have a colour preference?

You don't want the rose? That's fine sir/madam.

Trouble is the Star seems to employ idiots.

That is a very sensible approach.

You lot really don't like the Star do you?

Three pages and only one positive comment as the usual rubbish gets spouted - "spelling and grammar" is a common complaint about newspapers, but with no substance.

 

My personal favourite in this thread was the comment about the Star making money out of people at their most vulnerable. So what about florists who open up near cemeteries, funeral directors, WI cafes at hospitals etc? Death is big business.

I would guess that florists etc treat their customers with respect though and don't try to rip them off.

lol That is just typical isn't conspiracy theories eh. Listen mate I decided to go on google and see any critism of GKR and found some. To reply I had to join the forum and that is all. Everyone starts with a first comment. This happened to be mine. So believe what you want.

 

'You can convince a man against his will, but he will be of the same opinion still.'

 

Having looked at the GKR Organization with the view of neutrality and researched their organization. They are a legal organization in many countries and growing. They pay plenty of tax. They are of substance and cannot be viewed as pyramid as it is illegal to run pyramid schemes.

 

Any way whatever do and say what you want.

 

Just thought I would add my experience. Will not comment again. Enjoy your conspiracy theories.

Well, on this thread alone, there's a lot of people posting their actual experiences of GKR, which would be useful as a part of any 'research' on the company.

No-ones denying it's a legal organisation, or a growing one, or that they pay tax.

But when it comes to looking for a martial arts group for your child to go to- the fact that they pay a lot of tax is not of particular relevance- any company that earns lots of money will, of course, be paying a lot of tax, it does not make them a good martial arts option.

The relevant factors are going to be quality of tuition and, an absence of hard 'pressure selling' and no long term contracts that tie you into paying for months at a time.

And that's where GKR fails as a good option for your childs martial arts tuition.

I'd suggest that if you want to challenge the current highly negative reputation of GKR, you be best actually addressing those points and trying to show they are wrong, rather than posting an anecdote about a GKR practitioner beating up 2 guys and then coming up with a list of points that are a)irrelevant and b)things that no-ones denied (or even mentioned) in the first place (tax etc).

I was in Bradford recently and saw a couple of guys pick on another older guy. when one went to hit him he finished the guy off big time. The second attempted to kicked him (foolishly) and I thought the older guy had broken his leg. I was well impressed and asked him what martial art he used. He stated he trained with GKR. He was a tourist and not from this area. He did not state what belt he was and did not make it a big deal. So I believe a lot of this blogging against GKR is on the web is a reaction to the fact that they are a big organisation and also because they make money from martial arts. All of you watch too much movie martial arts and honor ****. Their is nothing wrong with making money. They do if this guy as stated is from GKR train people properly. I say get the snobbery out of martial arts and let people enjoy a bit of family association and confidence building. Hiring places cost money, uniforms cost money, liability insurance cost money. Whether you like it or not GKR are all over the world and are still very much financially viable. They are pro active at selling karate. Get over it and get a life and find something productive to say instead of sniping.

People are critisisng GKR for the (many) reasons covered in previous posts in this thread.

The fact that you claim to have witnessed a GKR practitioner take down 2 people is fairly irrelevant when it comes to the shady business practices of GKR, or it's effectiveness.

The guy could simply have been a good fighter (many people who are good at street fighting have had no training in martial arts, they are simply people who come from hard areas where fighting is a way of life from school age upwards).

He could have trained in any number of martial arts (e.g. Muay Thai, karate, boxing etc, etc) prior to joining GKR.

It's also entirely possible that the above post is from a GKR practitioner- it would certainly make good business sense for GKR to monitor these threads and post accordingly: not that I'm saying that is the case- just that it's possible, especially when the poster has a total of one posting on this board

Theres something slightly dodgy about a man(or woman) that needs to hide behind facial hair. Never ever trust a bloke with a beard (or one with scruffy shoes) and besides that, they arn't very hygienic are they? I mean bits of food and stuff can get stuck in there for days and you not realise!

A very common prejudice

Of course, to a large extent it's a cultural one- imagine a culture where the norm is for the men to be bearded e.g. some Islamic cultures, or, in the past, a Viking culture: there the opposite would be the case- a man with a shaved face would likely be viewed with suspicion- what's he trying to hide etc?

In a culture like that a man's beard would be seen as a natural part of his face- to shave it off could imply that he's trying to hide something about his beard that he doesn't like.

And, getting back to our culture, a prime reason why there are not more beards is because many men have previous tried to grow one, but felt embarrsed because it's not as full as they'd like, or has missing patches etc.

In those cases, the men are shaving, in part, to hide (what they see as) the inadeqaucies of their beards.

(A common mistake is to give up too early, or try to improve the apprearance by shaving particular bits off, an approach that rarely works- best advice is to grow it out for a coiple of months before dabbling with it).

we should have a national data base to cover events like this and other crimes ,only those with something to hide will object im sure

I have nothing to hide and I object.

As do a significant portion of the UK population, how you could seriously think otherwise is staggering.

Please elaborate on what "civil liberties" you'd lose.

pretty much covered here-

The right to be innocent until proven guilty. The right to privacy. The right to not give DNA to a murder investigation purely because it was commited in the same city.

Not that it's particularly relevant to the point you were raising, which was your brother-in-law being embaressed by being pulled in by the police- like i like before, that could be avoided, for those who wish it, by simply giving a voluntary DNA sample to the police.

Another point of view for this is my brother in law's scenario, mentioned earlier. He was collected from work by police, all very embarrassing.

 

If his DNA had been on the database he could have been eliminated from the enquiry without even knowing or being bothered by the police.

Well there's an easy solution to anyone who has your concerns- you, your brother and anyone else who feels the same, can simply turn up at the local police station and volunteer to have a DNA sample taken and put on record.

That way you can avoid the embarressment of being picked up for crimes you haven't committed.

Meanwhile, those of us who do care about our civil liberties, can refrain from doing so.

It's illegal for motor vehicle drivers to drive in the cycle lane, it should be illegal for cyclists to use the motor vehicle lanes when there's a cycle lane available..

That's your opinion. Fortunately the law disagrees and cyclists are not legally obliged to use the cycle lanes.

Full stop. Shouldn't be double standards. You keep to your lane and I'll keep to mine.

The road is not your lane- it's for everyone, including cyclists.

I got a 'Charge Plug' a few days back. It's been an interesting transition from the road unicycle.

I think the unicycles fixed gear nature has helped me adapt to the fixed gear on the bike, but the bikes a much higher gear- a bit over 70" (42t and 16t) and some of the hills which were merely tough on the uni, are brutal on the bike.

It's a lot of fun riding it though- apart from the simplicity, ease of maintenance and connection to the road, I'm also enjoying the unexpected silence (no clicking gears or freewheel noise).

If anyone's into meeting up for a ride, preferably S6/town area (there's at least 2 of us with fixies around the Langsett road/crookesmoor area) then post in this thread and we'll arrange it.

Incidently, does anyone know if the 'critical mass' style bike ride that used to happen on occasional Fridays starting outside the train station is still going?

My unicycle is a fixie

Very low gear compared to most fixie-bikes though, direct drive to a 26" wheel, with slightly shorter than normal cranks (150mm), probably giving a gear in the low 30 inches.

Advantage of that is that there isn't a single hill (with a road on it) that I can't get up on the uni (including Blake Street); though, obviously, top speed on the flats is a bit limited

I think unicycles have got similar benefits to fixies for health, as they require the back-pressure on the pedals for descending hills etc, with the additional benefits of a good workout for the core muscles, as the riding position is totally upright and control is via the abdominal and back muscles.

I did recently seriously consider getting a Marin Hamilton single speed mountain bike, with flippable hub (single speed freewheel on one side and fixed on the other)- but, instead I got a folding bike.

Still find myself mainly riding the unicycle though.

A good tip for anyone wanting to ride unicycles outdoors- avoid the little 20" wheel models like the plague- they're good for learning on and, good for specialised stuff like trials and unicycle hockey- but, to actually go any distance on them is an exercise in frustration.

move house...

Why don't you move house?

If you don't like the attitude of the residents where you live, then you move house and live in a place where late-night noise and rowdiness is acceptable?

do u realise how much it cost to get a taxi to town,about 15-20pounds one way,as if anybody can afford that,pubs are for drinking in,if u dont like it move away to a quiet country field somewere,im sure these pubs were here when u bought your house,people should chil out more.

What's the problem?- if people who live in small towns that have pubs whose customers, rather than just having a drink, insist on making so much racket that the neighbours complain and get the pub shut down; and, don't like it, then they can simply move to central sheffield instead.

Loads of pubs, loads of noise, no complaints.

People should chill out more

i think tattooing's just an acceptable form of self harm. anyone who pays someone to draw all over their flesh must really hate their body?

Most people who get tattooists are well-adjusted individuals- they do not hate their bodies- they just happen to love the look of ink in skin.

Especially those who put in the time to do the considerabler amount of research necessary to get an exceptional piece (checking out the reputation of the artist, spending many hours planning what design they want, reading tattoo mags, talking to others who've got good work on them etc, etc).

Far from 'hating' thier bodies, they appreciate and respect them enough to want to accentuate them with this unique art which has been a part of human culture for as long as it has existed.

That's not to say that all tattoos are good looking and well-thought-out, of course- the cliched 'spider-web-on-side-of-neck' or pieces done by 'artists' obviously selected soley on the criteria of the cheapest rate, are possibly indicators that the recipients sense of resect for their body is not as high as it could be.

But, there is no justification in grouping all tattooed individuals into that category, especially with the improved techniques and the incredible advances that have enabled modern tattoos to be genuine works of art.

In anticipation of the inevitable 'but what will they look like when they're 70??!'

Answer- They'll look much the same as any other 70 year old i.e. any observers who dislike wrinkled 70 year old skin will no doubt think they look terrible, but, presumably, they'll also not be admiring of any 70 year old without ink either?

And of course, the majority of those who have the self-confidence to know what they like (tatttoos) and the will the actually get it done, don't give a toss about the opinions of those who feel the need to condemn, critisise or comment on what they've chosen to do with their own bodies.

Personally, I can't understand the attitude of those who don't get inked- if I was a intolerant busy-body, I'd be wondering what it is they hate about thier skin so much that they'd not want to decorate it, or what low self-esteem they must have to be so fearful of what others might say, that they'd lack the courage to get a tattoo, etc, etc.

But, I don't think like that, because, what an individual chooses to do (or not do) to their own body, is none of my business- I certainly wouldn't judge a persons self-esteem or bodily opinion on the grounds of their lack of tattoos.

I've unicycled up both Conduit and Blake St. on many occasions.

Conduit is a doddle compared to Blake Street