Self praise is no Praise......

FlutterinBantam

Self praise is no praise my mother always said.

Seems it hasn't any currency out in Montrose, as I am quite frankly getting sick and tired with the back slapping and sympathising between the staff out there and the people in China.

Would lead one to believe its a PR exercise to try and justify the overblown salaries they earn.

Every handover its "What a great job they are doing and what long long hours they are working" Big frikken deal pilgrim!!

They are getting bloody well paid
They will get the time off later
The frikken OLympics come around once every 4 yrs
No one forced you to go out there.

So get over it for Chrissakes,get on with it and let the listeners who pay the license fees decide whether you are doing a good job or not:mad::mad::mad:

tSubh Dearg

Emmm sorry FB but isn't this similar to the jist in your other thread? Could you not have posted it there?

FlutterinBantam

Ahmmm didn't think it was, this is a phenomenon which has been going on all Olympics long and came to a head with Aengus McAnally today practically crying about poor Dessie out in Beijing.I was actualy wondering was the man volunteering to be out there with no pay.

I thought it was worth while to focus on that aspect in a separate thread, as the other dealt with rather incongrous throwing together of the privileged out in leafy Nutley Lane Montrose, with the gritty world of the arboreally challenged areas of west Dublin.

Kind of a human interest situation if you will.

You know best however, I won't complain whatever you want to do with the thread.

tSubh Dearg

We'll leave it for the moment and see how it goes.

FlutterinBantam

Downhill, I'd say Subh.

Fuzzy Clam

I'd like to know how they can justify sending 38(i think) staff to China to cover the Olympics. Nice little junket paid for by us.

2fivers

I Totally agree*.

It should have been just Marty Morrisey. He should have been given a handicam, a usb microphone and a Lidl laptop and been told to do it all himself.

He could have been given a bicycle (there's nine million of them there. That's a fact) and a taxi timetable and been told to cover the equestrian events over in Hong Kong and the outdoor Swimming on the Chinese north coast too.

And when there are up to 10 Irish atheletes competing simultaneously (say the paddies were gallantly failing in Track and field in the birds nest, Sailing in Quingdao and the horsie jumping in Sha Tin) he should be comfortably be able to use his superpowers to cover all events satisfactorily ( as well as handle the technical side of the broadcast for radio,television and internet).

He would then give us an in depth update on the interesting sports currently happening in the surrounds of Bejing itself that we've acknowledged we're no good at and don't partake in (Football, basketball, beach volleyball etc, with gratuitous close ups during the latter) and be finished in time to get to the Workers arena outside the Olympic city to have an ould goo at the boxing, before putting on his 'hard news' hat & nipping back to Hong Kong to be there in time for the now obligatory "Irish horse takes crack" Olympic news conference.

Shame on rte for opting to cover a worldwide sporting event with some degree of totality, instead of just doing it half-arsedly like we're used to.

I mean, There were never any complaints when rte did things half arsedly, were there?


(*not true)

FlutterinBantam

Easy on the irony there Fivers,best served sparsely I would opine?

To get back to the real subject of the thread, I certainly am not complaining about the coverage from RTE, it was excellent.

What I am commenting on is this gratuitous back slapping and "piling on" to use a gridiron term,from every RTE person in Montrose.

Even Micheál O' Muircearthaig was at it today.

Could you bang the bottom of your irony bottle at the correct issue by any chance??

2fivers

Opine away, you haven't needed permission before, Why start now?

Post #7 was in direct response to post #6.

However, I understand your need to construct convoluted (if slightly strangled) metaphors & idioms, and therefore my Irony bottle and I will endeavour to ensure our banged responses revolve solely around you and your obsession with Montrose staffers in future.

FlutterinBantam

Obsession would be a tad strong imho.

May I conclude that you work there, as your attitude to criticism concurs very well with the attitude of most RTE presenters when someone who is paying their huge salary has the temerity to voice an opinion, i.e. an ordinary listener.

Might I suggest that quite a few discerning listeners and admirers of RTE1 are mightily unimpressed by the spin of the "terrible hard work and the long hours worked by those in China"

You did well,but that's what you are paid to do,get on with it;)

Fuzzy Clam

2fivers, what a pile of horse**** you come out with.

Your point,presuming you had one,would be better conveyed without resorting to a low level of humour which only results in degrading you.

I refer not only to the above posts #7 & 9 but to others also.

2fivers

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Obsession would be a tad strong imho.

May I conclude that you work there, as your attitude to criticism concurs very well with the attitude of most RTE presenters when someone who is paying their huge salary has the temerity to voice an opinion, i.e. an ordinary listener.

Might I suggest that quite a few discerning listeners and admirers of RTE1 are mightily unimpressed by the spin of the "terrible hard work and the long hours worked by those in China"

You did well,but that's what you are paid to do,get on with it;)

You may indeed conclude that I work there, as you seem to conclude that anyone who disagrees with you is an employee of rte. You would however, be terribly wrong. Again.

In fact, you'd be as wrong as you were the last time that you alluded to my being an employee of rte. You were wrong then, and you're wrong now, and the argument gets that little bit less witty every time it's thrown out in desperation.

I cant speak for the dozens of other posters you've 'outed' who've contradicted you when you were in full on "Rte punched my grandmother" mode in the past, and were tarred with the devastatingly clever "you work for rte" brush by way of riposte, but I'd reckon your 'rte employee outed' hit rate isn't all that high, realistically.
I'd go so far as to say that the amount of rte employees who actually read what you have to say, never mind care about it, is a very small number indeed.

I think you've given the moderators sufficient grounds to have this thread shifted into your other "Olympics - I hate Rte" thread.

In fact, there's pretty good grounds to collate all your "I hate Rte" posts into one enormous thread called "I am always right, and anyone who says otherwise works for rte" and that way, we'll all know where to find the information on how much a shower of bastards rte are,and how anyone who disagrees with you is obviously Joe Duffy in disguise, together in one handy location.

Hell, the mods could even pin it, for the laugh.

2fivers

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

2fivers, what a pile of horse**** you come out with.

Your point,presuming you had one,would be better conveyed without resorting to a low level of humour which only results in degrading you.

I refer not only to the above posts #7 & 9 but to others also.

Im sorry you can't do funny. I was rubbing it in a bit, wasn't I? Still, chin up. You're probably good at other things.

FlutterinBantam

2fivers wrote: »

You may indeed conclude that I work there, as you seem to conclude that anyone who disagrees with you is an employee of rte. You would however, be terribly wrong. Again.

In fact, you'd be as wrong as you were the last time that you alluded to my being an employee of rte. You were wrong then, and you're wrong now, and the argument gets that little bit less witty every time it's thrown out in desperation.

I cant speak for the dozens of other posters you've 'outed' who've contradicted you when you were in full on "Rte punched my grandmother" mode in the past, and were tarred with the devastatingly clever "you work for rte" brush by way of riposte, but I'd reckon your 'rte employee outed' hit rate isn't all that high, realistically.
I'd go so far as to say that the amount of rte employees who actually read what you have to say, never mind care about it, is a very small number indeed.

I think you've given the moderators sufficient grounds to have this thread shifted into your other "Olympics - I hate Rte" thread.

In fact, there's pretty good grounds to collate all your "I hate Rte" posts into one enormous thread called "I am always right, and anyone who says otherwise works for rte" and that way, we'll all know where to find the information on how much a shower of bastards rte are,and how anyone who disagrees with you is obviously Joe Duffy in disguise, together in one handy location.

Hell, the mods could even pin it, for the laugh.

Could I suggest a visit to Specsavers might be in order Sir.

For two reasons.

No 1. The thread has a title-please read it and address the correct points.

No.2. Several times during the course of the thread I expressed admiration and praise for RTE,yet you transpose that into hate.

I fail to get the jist of your argument sir,other than just a personal attack on me which the hardworking Mods of this forum might perhaps have noticed.
Either way it does not bother me Sir,as, as a licence payer, i have every right to voice any criticism I like about RTE ,which if you actually took the time to note the actual points,usually has an element of truth.

They say truth sometimes hurts hmmm

Fuzzy Clam

2fivers wrote: »

Im sorry you can't do funny. I was rubbing it in a bit, wasn't I? Still, chin up. You're probably good at other things.

Oh, I can do funny. Thats the problem. Your just not funny. Don't delude yourself. I hope YOU are better at other things because a comic you are not.

Satirical humour can be a most effective way of conveying a point but sarcasm rarely hits the mark.

I'm beginning to think you can't help it as almost every post you make contains sarcasm.

I used to enjoy a bit of sarcasm in measure but you bring it to a new low.

2fivers

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Could I suggest a visit to Specsavers might be in order Sir.

For two reasons.

No 1. The thread has a title-please read it and address the correct points.

No.2. Several times during the course of the thread I expressed admiration and praise for RTE,yet you transpose that into hate.

I fail to get the jist of your argument sir,other than just a personal attack on me which the hardworking Mods of this forum might perhaps have noticed.
Either way it does not bother me Sir,as, as a licence payer, i have every right to voice any criticism I like about RTE ,which if you actually took the time to note the actual points,usually has an element of truth.

They say truth sometimes hurts hmmm

In fairness, with 'truth' at stake here, it's worth mentioning that you only actually complimented Rte once in this thread, not "several times", and that was was only when you mistakenly assumed that my post #7 was addressed to you, and not to another poster on the thread who intimated his dissatisfaction with rte.

No 'attack' on you existed. What did exist post your interjection was a questioning of how you regularly handle criticism of your posts : People who disagree with you are inevitably accused of being in the employ of whoever it is you currently despise.

Ergo : The only reason that Anyone could disagree with you is because they are completely biased.

This is, quite frankly, a bunch of arse.

If this stock response is a joke, it's well past it's use by date and cannot possibly be considered as a tool to move forward any kind of debate (making discussion futile, no matter what the title of the thread may be), and if it's offered as a serious belief - that is, if you really believe that anyone expressing an opinion different to yours can only be a paid employee of whatever body you are currently attempting to disparage with flowery-prose - then you may have issues more far serious than a fondness for trolling.

Regarding your veiled accusation that the moderators may see my attempt at questioning the content of your repetitious posts as some sort of cyber-bullying of you personally, I would suggest that the moderator input earlier in this very thread would seem to say that the powers-that-be are quite aware of what happens on your regular "I hate" threads, & maybe even how you repeatedly react to criticism of your posts thereon, and so they might yet act accordingly, just possibly not in the way you seem to be imagining.

You have a good day now, and stop thinking everyone's out to get you. That's a sign of paranoia, y'know.

FlutterinBantam

Incorrect Sir,both posts #8 and #10 contain references in a positive way to RTE.

It is also incorrect to hypothesise that "I assumed anything".

I didn't assume anything, and knew exactly at whom your post was directed, a poster who made a certain statement early on and whom I believe was not a million miles away from the truth!!!.

Now can you either address the thread topic sir, or stfu.

2fivers

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Incorrect Sir,both posts #8 and #10 contain references in a positive way to RTE.

It is also incorrect to hypothesise that "I assumed anything".

I didn't assume anything, and knew exactly at whom your post was directed, a poster who made a certain statement early on and whom I believe was not a million miles away from the truth!!!.

Now can you either address the thread topic sir, or stfu.

I can "stfu"?

How pleasant, the spirit of debate is alive and well.
Still, it is somewhat point-proving regarding your over-reaction to any kind of criticism or questioning of your posts.

(For the record - your post #10 is the one where you alleged I was obviously an employee of rte because I disagreed with you. Not only is that another incorrect assumption which you are unwilling & unable to defend, but if its a "positive reference", then I'm the king of Spain. )

FlutterinBantam

You clearly are reading a different thread Sir.

In post #10,I merely surmised that you might be an RTE staffer,given the similarity of your attitude to the on air reaction when RTE come in for criticism by their customers.

You are trying to paint me into a corner sir, an operation which is quite futile, as all I am interested in is the truth,not a spinning exercise for RTE,or an endless convoluted debate on things I didn't say;)

FlutterinBantam

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Obsession would be a tad strong imho.

May I conclude that you work there, as your attitude to criticism concurs very well with the attitude of most RTE presenters when someone who is paying their huge salary has the temerity to voice an opinion, i.e. an ordinary listener.

Might I suggest that quite a few discerning listeners and admirers of RTE1 are mightily unimpressed by the spin of the "terrible hard work and the long hours worked by those in China"

You did well,but that's what you are paid to do,get on with it;)

I guess I really do have to spell it out:cool:

grumpytrousers

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

Oh, I can do funny. Thats the problem. Your just not funny. Don't delude yourself. I hope YOU are better at other things because a comic you are not.

Satirical humour can be a most effective way of conveying a point but sarcasm rarely hits the mark.

I'm beginning to think you can't help it as almost every post you make contains sarcasm.

I used to enjoy a bit of sarcasm in measure but you bring it to a new low.

Oh i dunno - the Marty Morrissey superpowers thing made me chuckle a bit...

humberklog

grumpytrousers wrote: »

Oh i dunno - the Marty Morrissey superpowers thing made me chuckle a bit...

Same here although it was way off topic. Led by a previous post that was way off topic too. (38 people sounds about right for the comprehensive coverage they delivered. It ain't just about the voice you hear. There's quite a few more involved in delivering that voice).
I get Bantam but don't agree. I noticed it a bit too but thought it added a human quality to the overall broadcast. As opposed to treating it like an individual giving himself praise it struck me more like a football team giving praise and encouragement to one another in order to maintain a positive constant. Like volleyballers high fiving as opposed to Ed Brne telling you his last joke was funny.

FlutterinBantam

Ok, good points there,happy to acknowledge them.

Just thought they overdid it though.

Fuzzy Clam

humberklog wrote: »

Same here although it was way off topic. Led by a previous post that was way off topic too. (38 people sounds about right for the comprehensive coverage they delivered. It ain't just about the voice you hear. There's quite a few more involved in delivering that voice).
I get Bantam but don't agree. I noticed it a bit too but thought it added a human quality to the overall broadcast. As opposed to treating it like an individual giving himself praise it struck me more like a football team giving praise and encouragement to one another in order to maintain a positive constant. Like volleyballers high fiving as opposed to Ed Brne telling you his last joke was funny.

I'm not doubting that RTEs coverage was comprehensive. I don't generally watch RTE,so I followed,as I'm sure many others did, the excellent BBC coverage which included all or many of the events that our Irish athletes competed in.
While I agree(shock!) with 2fivers that RTE would have been critisised had they not covered the Games, I wonder if the money would not have been better spent improving home produced programming. (Off topic,I know)

Fuzzy Clam

grumpytrousers wrote: »

Oh i dunno - the Marty Morrissey superpowers thing made me chuckle a bit...

Maybe it did but IMHO bringing sarcasm into replies does little to bring debate to the table.

The Muppet

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

Maybe it did but IMHO bringing sarcasm into replies does little to bring debate to the table.

I though 2fivers made his points very well. I enjoy a bit of humour and while sarcasm is not everyones cup of tea and not always appropriate when it is thought out and delivered as well as it was in 2fivers first post it has its place and can be very effective on sites like this IMHO .

Accusing someone of having a vested interest just because they disagree with your opinion is far more detrimental to civilised debate than a bit of good humoured sarcasm.

FlutterinBantam

And your point Sir??

Fuzzy Clam

The Muppet wrote: »

I though 2fivers made his points very well. I enjoy a bit of humour and while sarcasm is not everyones cup of tea and not always appropriate when it is thought out and delivered as well as it was in 2fivers first post it has its place and can be very effective on sites like this IMHO .

Accusing someone of having a vested interest just because they disagree with your opinion is far more detrimental to civilised debate than a bit of good humoured sarcasm.

Personly I didn't find it funny and although I accept that 2fivers does have a point, sarcasm is frequently used as a "put down" and in his reply to me that "I don't do humour" and "maybe I'm good at something else(or words to that effect)" was just that(certainly not good humoured). I'm obviously older, wiser and (hopefully) more mature than 2fivers in that in the past I have used sarcasm and have learnt from that mistake. Yes, there are time when it is justified but when someone uses it in their first and second reply to a persons post,I think that is wrong.

2fivers

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

Maybe it did but IMHO bringing sarcasm into replies does little to bring debate to the table.

You're right , of course.

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

I'm obviously older, wiser and (hopefully) more mature than 2fivers

A very noble attitude.

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

2fivers, what a pile of horse**** you come out with.

Oh. Ok. Instead of maybe considering my response, or even resorting to Youthful, unwise, immature sarcasm, It seems that I would have been better off just losing the head when confronted with an unexpected reply, and I should have sworn like a gutter-mouthed primary school child in response. Yeah. THAT would have brought debate to the table. No doubt....



Hypocrisy? - Score!
High moral ground? - Fail.


__________

Purveyor of shovels to dig bigger holes since May 2008

FlutterinBantam

What kicked all this off of course,if I can remind people who must be budding politicians, as they steadfastly refuse to address the question asked, was inoffensive Aengus launching into valedictory speech of a good five minutes in praise of all the "hardworkin" RTE radio people on Monday's show.

Totally out of context and unnecessary.

Some people here must work for the RAF with all the "chaff" they are throwing about.:cool:

FlutterinBantam

...and they are still at it. Todays Tubridy had Jimmy "Just back from China where I commentated on two hundred and thirty four fights"Magee and am now pitching for a job in 2012 in London.

"How many OHlympics is that Jimmy??" "twelve Summer, two Winter"

Put a frikken sock in it lads!!

humberklog

Fuzzy Clam wrote: »

I'm obviously older, wiser and (hopefully) more mature than 2fivers in that in the past I have used sarcasm and have learnt from that mistake.

I'll match 2fivers sarcasm and raise the stakes to being condescending?
Personally I'd take sarcasm, what with it's humour, ahead of condescending. What with it's lack of humour.
Back to OP.
Magee will hopefully be back slapped towards the nearest nursing home. Combine both (self praise and physical force) to the good.

Bondvillain

grumpytrousers wrote: »

Oh i dunno - the Marty Morrissey superpowers thing made me chuckle a bit...

Me too. I liked the nine million bicycles line as well (although that was more dry observation than sarcasm, so I should probably expect an admonishment from the emperor of the thread for going off topic)

So back to topic we go. If Ryan Tubridy or Aonghus McAnally et al who were not at the olympics wish to extend their congratulations to their colleagues who were, on the grounds that they thought they did well, I cant really see the problem in that.

I incorrectly took the thread title to mean that one or more of the Beijing contingent had been blowing their own trumpets about supposed 'heroic' exploits.
That would have been unpleasant, but it seems it's not the case, and it looks more a case of (as humberklog correctly, imo, pointed out) genuine human interaction between colleagues and friends for the purpose of positivity and morale. Cant imagine how people could take offence & make that into a viable issue meself, but I suppose each man stays awake at night worrying about different things.

FlutterinBantam

Offense might be too strong in my opinion, and lying awake at night a tad over the top.

However, to reiterate my point to those who,perhaps deliberately,perhaps not, decide to miss it.

I have no problem with normal interaction and morale building.
I have no problem with people welcoming people back.

Can all that not be done off air???
If it has to be done on air , can they not limit it???.

What we got was a barrage of praise from every presenter I listened to which was obviously orchestrated from above and designed to throw a smoke screen over the huge cost of the operation.

yes they did a good job,but so do bus drivers/doctors/nurses/miners etc etc.

They got damn well paid for it and will get the time off,so lets not make martyrs of them.

That's all I'm saying;)

Fulton Crown

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

What we got was a barrage of praise from every presenter I listened to which was obviously orchestrated from above and designed to throw a smoke screen over the huge cost of the operation.

yes they did a good job,but so do bus drivers/doctors/nurses/miners etc etc.

They got damn well paid for it and will get the time off,so lets not make martyrs of them.

That's all I'm saying;)

Look whats the big deal - RTE is a "Corporate" and like all big organisations will act to protect it's interests.

They mounted a very expensive coverage package for the Bejing Olympics - both "a tome"(as magee would say) and in China.

It's only to be expected that they would want to big this up as much as possible and do so by using their priveleged position as the national broadcaster to do so "on air" on the basis that if enough people say you did an excellent job - then you will believe you did an excellent job.

Standard Corporate self preservation in my book - interesting though that it was the "Z Listers" who did most of the congratulating - some self preservation there too methinks.

For my mind it was O'Herlihy and Collins a tome who did the real work - couldn't see why some of the liggers who were in China - were there TBH.

As for magee pitchin for the 2012 job - can someone please tell the guy to go...go in the name of God - his number is up.