Salvation at last!?

barneystinson

wellboytoo wrote: »

I would never have mentioned him only you were looking for "proof" of a perception(sic) !
So what do you actually want?
Everyone to agree with you?

No, no, he couldn't get his daily fix of browbeating without someone foolish enough to disagree with him...!

fuzzy dunlop

sparkling sea wrote: »

Keep your hair on, I thought this was a discussion not a competition, maybe the name calling ect is being actively competitive in your world, we differ on this one, I think your are trying to bully people into submission by insulting them, you disagree that won't surprise either of us.


FYI - I do eat babies, as long as they're the sweet sticky variety, so even without a shred of evidence to suggest I do, I still do.

I have to ask, why would I be desparate, desparate for what ??? I never assume anything one way or another without knowing all the facts/ reasons. I assume anything is possible when I don't actually have all the imformation. Its pointless and reckless to assume you know, IMO.

And

Again you are misrepresenting what I say, I don't know what all peoples perceptions are, niether do I know how they affect the city's attraction rate for employment or if they have any affect at all, but unlikely you, I wouldn't and can't rule it in or out and I think all possible issues need to be addressed.

I know the Workers Party state we were the stand alone city for them in the 1990's and early 2000's, I know the Times recently published an article about the IMO (mistaken) preception of Waterford as a militant city. I know that it more than possible, that in an effort to ignore this preception, it is possible it has become self-fulfilling, however I also know that strikes are very rare in Waterford, and have been for quite some time. The people of Waterford are desparate to work and rebuild the oldest City in Ireland, to the best City in Ireland.

There is any awful lot of information we just don't have, but we now know it may be an issue that may need to be addressed and thats all we know

Nobody is name calling only your good self. The Bullying accusation is only a slur because you've made no worthwhile arguments. I have seen you try the same tactic before when on other threads you appointed yourself some sort of authority on what women do and feel. All your are trying to do is rally some support around you. Remember this on the abortion thread? It didn't work there and it won't work here. You and others might not like what I say but you won't stop me saying it with baseless accusations.

Now here is some news for you. If there is a perception problem with regard to militancy that has no substance in facts or evidence which is indeed the case then the problem is where is the perception is being propagated. And the answer to that is people like you saying there is a problem contrary to the evidence. Fight the perception not the straw man of non existent militancy. This is what I m doing. You are trying to create the perception. I am fighting it. There is no evidence to support the militancy slur. Yet you keep saying that doesn't mean its not there. It means exactly this. The statistics for days lost due to strikes are documented and recorded by the CSO and others. You don't want to look for it because you don't want to let go of your assertion. I also suspect from the way you seem to follow me around that's it more about getting one over on me than actually proving something of worth. There is plenty of information out there. This city has been seen as the most attractive location for FDI by non other that the Financial Times. What more do you need? Purges of union members? One more time they evidence of militancy being worse here that Cork or Limerick does not exist. So why are you and others trying to reaffirm it?

barneystinson

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Nobody is name calling only your good self. The Bullying accusation is only a slur because you've made no worthwhile arguments. I have seen you try the same tactic before when on other threads you appointed yourself some sort of authority on what women do and feel. All your are trying to do is rally some support around you. Remember this on the abortion thread? It didn't work there and it won't work here. You and others might not like what I say but you won't stop me saying it with baseless accusations.

Now here is some news for you. If there is a perception problem with regard to militancy that has no substance in facts or evidence which is indeed the case then the problem is where is the perception is being propagated. And the answer to that is people like you saying there is a problem contrary to the evidence. Fight the perception not the straw man of non existent militancy. This is what I m doing. You are trying to create the perception. I am fighting it. There is no evidence to support the militancy slur. Yet you keep saying that doesn't mean its not there. It means exactly this. The statistics for days lost due to strikes are documented and recorded by the CSO and others. You don't want to look for it because you don't want to let go of your assertion. I also suspect from the way you seem to follow me around that's it more about getting one over on me than actually proving something of worth. There is plenty of information out there. This city has been seen as the most attractive location for FDI by non other that the Financial Times. What more do you need? Purges of union members? One more time they evidence of militancy being worse here that Cork or Limerick does not exist. So why are you and others trying to reaffirm it?

This is gas. No-one has said Waterford is militant, they've said that its a perception others have of the place.

Denying out of hand that such a perception exists, and getting very bitchy and personal about it, isn't going to do much good!

Personally I'm not sure if that perception is still prevalent, but I don't see how you can say with any certainty that it isn't...

fuzzy dunlop

barneystinson wrote: »

This is gas. No-one has said Waterford is militant, they've said that its a perception others have of the place.

Denying out of hand that such a perception exists, and getting very bitchy and personal about it, isn't going to do much good!

Personally I'm not sure if that perception is still prevalent, but I don't see how you can say with any certainty that it isn't...

The "perception" is a fallacy that mostly exists within Waterford. If anyone is getting bitchy about is because its keeps getting regurgitated on here ad nauseum for no reason. No where in Ireland has to justify itself like we do. I would argue the only ones obseesed with our so called millitant perception is ourselves. If such a perception exists then who is talking about other then ourselves? Look at the times article again and see who brought up the topic.

fuzzy dunlop

wellboytoo wrote: »

I would never have mentioned him only you were looking for "proof" of a perception(sic) !
So what do you actually want?
Everyone to agree with you?

So Jimmy Kelly is from Waterford? This is proof of something? What exactly? He doe not represent Waterford alone. Maybe we should indict the the whole of Dublin because one constituency voted for Bertie Ahearn.Is Kilkenny Militant because Liam Doran is from there? Where else in Ireland does a whole city or county villify itself because of one individual? Nowehere! So why should we? This ideas that we are somehow terminally unique is totally irrational and unjustified.

Wanderer2010

barneystinson wrote: »

No, no, he couldn't get his daily fix of browbeating without someone foolish enough to disagree with him...!

He only browbeats people from the safety of his big strong keyboard though. Guaranteed to be a shy, passive aggressive character in person who wouldnt say boo to a goose. Classic case.

fuzzy dunlop

barneystinson wrote: »

No, no, he couldn't get his daily fix of browbeating without someone foolish enough to disagree with him...!

Who am I browbeating? This is the first of your posts I responded to. You responded to me remember and I find it interesting that you describe yourself as foolish.

fuzzy dunlop

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

He only browbeats people from the safety of his big strong keyboard though. Guaranteed to be a shy, passive aggressive character in person who wouldnt say boo to a goose. Classic case.

Really:D Like you're sticking your neck out here. Do everyone a favour and stop projecting your own characteristics onto others;)

Wanderer2010

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Really:D Like you're sticking your neck out here. Do everyone a favour and stop projecting your own characteristics onto others;)

Well you are a keyboard warrior, Fuzzy Dunlop. I posted 3 times about having experience about the actual (not a perception) union militancy in this city but, like a dog with a bone, you choose to ignore all my points and continued your long, long, (oh so long) riposte against one or two posters above just because they had a different view to you. I hope you are a journalist with those writing skills you have because otherwise you are wasting some amount of your real life arguing on the internet.

fuzzy dunlop

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Well you are a keyboard warrior, Fuzzy Dunlop. I posted 3 times about having experience about the actual (not a perception) union militancy in this city but, like a dog with a bone, you choose to ignore all my points and continued your long, long, (oh so long) riposte against one or two posters above just because they had a different view to you. I hope you are a journalist with those writing skills you have because otherwise you are wasting some amount of your real life arguing on the internet.

Funny for a keyboard warrior I only have half the posts you do (and here a year longer) and post in a select group within a select forum.Hardly the activities of a keyboard warrior. You just don't get it do you? The "experience" of one person is not worth talking about and is unreliable as its completely anecdotal. Everyone has their own biases. There is also whole host of other things to be considered! Like the nature of the work. Is it low skilled manual labour where people are under constant pressure with regard to wages? Are the incomes in the Waterford factories lower? When you consider the nature of most of the factories in Waterford this would seem to be the case. But lets not consider this shall we? Let's just be lazy and say we're more militant down here.

Hoffmans

Will a new facility provoid jobs for locals or just undargrads from the wider south east area ,langers , cats & yella bellies
Like the glanbia setup, add dairy farmer kids to that list too...

Hoffmans

Will a new facility provoid jobs for locals or just undargrads from the wider south east area ,langers , cats & yella bellies
Like the glanbia setup, add dairy farmer kids to that list too...

fuzzy dunlop

Hoffmans wrote: »

Will a new facility provoid jobs for locals or just undargrads from the wider south east area ,langers , cats & yella bellies
Like the glanbia setup, add dairy farmer kids to that list too...

If the locals have the qualifications. They can't discriminate based on locality. The jobs are basically open to anyone. But usually there is a knock on eefect from an investment. So there will be spin off jobs for smaller companies providing site services, then there is the local economy in gerenral that will be bosted which should create some jobs.

wellboytoo

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

So Jimmy Kelly is from Waterford? This is proof of something? What exactly? He doe not represent Waterford alone. Maybe we should indict the the whole of Dublin because one constituency voted for Bertie Ahearn.Is Kilkenny Militant because Liam Doran is from there? Where else in Ireland does a whole city or county villify itself because of one individual? Nowehere! So why should we? This ideas that we are somehow terminally unique is totally irrational and unjustified.

“Everything you see or hear or experience in any way at all is specific to you. You create a universe by perceiving it, so everything in the universe you perceive is specific to you.” – Douglas Adams

fuzzy dunlop

wellboytoo wrote: »

“Everything you see or hear or experience in any way at all is specific to you. You create a universe by perceiving it, so everything in the universe you perceive is specific to you.” – Douglas Adams

As long as you remember that includes yourself and "Waterford Militancy".

wellboytoo

BBM77 wrote: »

To my mind the people who claim Waterford has a particular militancy problem are doing the best job of giving evidence that it doesn’t. If the best examples they can come up with is one factory and one person in a city with a long industrial history it proves to me that Waterford has no particular militancy problem.

You missed the critical word. ... perception

Harry Palmr

Anyone in business reading this thread might decide to go elsewhere. :pac:

Wanderer2010

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Anyone in business reading this thread might decide to go elsewhere. :pac:

Exactly! We have one keyboard warrior (and WHERE you post and being a keyboard warrior are not related in any way) trying to bully people who offer an alternative viewpoint on how Waterford is perceived at home and abroad. Would he be so vocal and demeaning face to face??? Hmm...

barneystinson

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Who am I browbeating? This is the first of your posts I responded to. You responded to me remember and I find it interesting that you describe yourself as foolish.

Really, where do I describe myself as foolish?

BBM77

wellboytoo wrote: »

You missed the critical word. ... perception

Here we go, because I have a contrary opinion I missed something.

The perception is purely local from people who feel the need to knock the place to feel better about themselves. People from outside Waterford are only picking up on this, as another post said, beat ourselves up attitude and throwing it back at us when it suits.

To say that there is an external perception of problems in Waterford in the light of a company having Waterford on a short list for anything up to a €1 billion investment without being able to give even the slightest proof of this perception is just ridiculous. As I have said before companies don’t even consider investing €1 billion in cities with militancy problems perceived or otherwise.

barneystinson

Lads I reckon this is just one of those situations where people will have to agree to disagree - several posters here are convinced that there is a PERCEPTION of Waterford's workforce as being prone to militancy.

Others, with their knickers spectacularly twistified over it, are convinced that nobody anywhere would harbour such thoughts about Waterford people, except ourselves because we just like to be down on ourselves.

The people who believe this perception still exists (and in my case I do so as a result of conversations with people from outside of Waterford while working in other locations around the country*) are unlikely to be able to provide the kind of evidence that the naysayers require, because it's like being asked to prove a negative... although the negative in this case is partially evident in the dearth of inward investment relative to other locations.

However whether, or the extent to which, this is a result of the perception that some of us believe exists is unknowable since we are never going to get a straight answer from the people who actually know the exact reasons for these decisions.

All we can really say is, some of us have met people extraneous to Waterford who have given us reason to believe this perception still exists, and some of us haven't met anyone who expressed such a view (or perhaps the reason Fuzzy is so sure there are no such people is that he's spent the last 15 years traking them down and eliminating them... )

*Just to qualify the above, I'm talking about water cooler discussion with other "man on the street" types, as opposed to people involved with the IDA, but in any event, it's clear to me that there does exist to some extent this perception about Waterford

wellboytoo

BBM77 wrote: »

Here we go, because I have a contrary opinion I missed something.

The perception is purely local from people who feel the need to knock the place to feel better about themselves. People from outside Waterford are only picking up on this, as another post said, beat ourselves up attitude and throwing it back at us when it suits.

To say that there is an external perception of problems in Waterford in the light of a company having Waterford on a short list for anything up to a €1 billion investment without being able to give even the slightest proof of this perception is just ridiculous. As I have said before companies don’t even consider investing €1 billion in cities with militancy problems perceived or otherwise.

Hey hold up there. I never said any of the above, none Nada not one bit of it my only contribution was a tongue in cheek mention of Mr Kelly. I know Waterford has no more a militant work force than anywhere else in Ireland, but I am not naive enough to deny that we still carry the stigma of our past mistakes in some quarters and so is Anyone else who denies this .
I have had to personally defend Waterford on many an occasion from this accusation, so my only point is we are still fighting a rearguard action in some quarters for mistakes made a long time ago ,by stupid militant people.
You may not like it but there it is.

sparkling sea

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Nobody is name calling only your good self. The Bullying accusation is only a slur because you've made no worthwhile arguments. I have seen you try the same tactic before when on other threads you appointed yourself some sort of authority on what women do and feel. All your are trying to do is rally some support around you. Remember this on the abortion thread? It didn't work there and it won't work here. You and others might not like what I say but you won't stop me saying it with baseless accusations.

Now here is some news for you. If there is a perception problem with regard to militancy that has no substance in facts or evidence which is indeed the case then the problem is where is the perception is being propagated. And the answer to that is people like you saying there is a problem contrary to the evidence. Fight the perception not the straw man of non existent militancy. This is what I m doing. You are trying to create the perception. I am fighting it. There is no evidence to support the militancy slur. Yet you keep saying that doesn't mean its not there. It means exactly this. The statistics for days lost due to strikes are documented and recorded by the CSO and others. You don't want to look for it because you don't want to let go of your assertion. I also suspect from the way you seem to follow me around that's it more about getting one over on me than actually proving something of worth. There is plenty of information out there. This city has been seen as the most attractive location for FDI by non other that the Financial Times. What more do you need? Purges of union members? One more time they evidence of militancy being worse here that Cork or Limerick does not exist. So why are you and others trying to reaffirm it?

All you prove is that you consistantly try to bully posters, no surprise there. Do facts come into play with you, at all because there is no evidence in anything you write that they do, its all your perception, it means nothing to me but I take it on board.

You make no sense, it is senseless to equate different ummeasured variables, this will never negate a possible preception. Ignoring and not tackling this possible perception will just mean it lingers that bit longer.

This City will of course be seen as an attractive to most businesses because it would be an excellent place to locate.

But

All multinationals wil at the very least, conduct a PEST or SWOT analysis, both on the macro and mico climate that exists in any new possible locations, no matter how you twist it, any campaign to promote Waterford needs to be aware of all factors and to tackle them, if we really want to make sure they are truley eradicated.

Digital Society

Why do people think that businesses do more than look at the numbers when setting up shop?

As if a plan is gonna be halted which has been planned for years and costing millions to research is gonna be cancelled because of some ancient protest or some other ancient crap.

That kind of nonsense might influence some little backstreet shop but not a billion dollar industry.

You honestly think thats what sends the IT crowd to Galway instead of here? No. They go like sheep and follow each other. We just need to get one in and the rest will follow.

The_Shotz

Looks like genzyme are also about to make an announcement, possibly extra jobs...

http://www.wlrfm.com/news-single.php?cat=1&id=9417

fuzzy dunlop

sparkling sea wrote: »

All you prove is that you consistantly try to bully posters, no surprise there. Do facts come into play with you, at all because there is no evidence in anything you write that they do, its all your perception, it means nothing to me but I take it on board.

You make no sense, it is senseless to equate different ummeasured variables, this will never negate a possible preception. Ignoring and not tackling this possible perception will just mean it lingers that bit longer.

This City will of course be seen as an attractive to most businesses because it would be an excellent place to locate.

But

All multinationals wil at the very least, conduct a PEST or SWOT analysis, both on the macro and mico climate that exists in any new possible locations, no matter how you twist it, any campaign to promote Waterford needs to be aware of all factors and to tackle them, if we really want to make sure they are truley eradicated.

If I am bullying which I am not you and a few others would have reported me by now. This is usually what happens here. But again there is no bullying so get another string for your banjo besides the two you have called militancy and bullying. You're just hiding behind something because you have no evidence and no argument. Once again you are wrong about so called "unmeasured variables." They are measured you just referred to it as a PEST analysis. The FT did one and Waterford came ahead of any comparable city in Ireland which I referred to. This proves you are wrong on two counts one is that I have provided no evidence and two that there is a perception of militancy that is somehow overarching.Yet you and a few others are hanging on to "phantom militancy" based on nothing but a "fella told me so"Why is that? There is nobody thinking about Waterford in that context except you and few others looking for straw men to knock down. Probably to deflect attention from where it should be focused i.e. political ineptitude. But it is plain from your posts that logic went out the window ages ago and yet you have the gall to say others make no sense. Your saying it is a great place to locate and it isn't because of a perception of militancy. Prove it! If it exists it will exist somewhere on a PEST analysis as you say. The FT would have picked up on it! The IDA would have come out with it. But none of them have! The approach you are taking is borderline fascism at worst and McCarthyism at best. Jesus wept "eradication" . When you are using language like this you've seriously lost the plot.

fuzzy dunlop

The_Shotz wrote: »

Looks like genzyme are also about to make an announcement, possibly extra jobs...

http://www.wlrfm.com/news-single.php?cat=1&id=9417

What you mean Genzyme are not looking for "Reds under the bed!":eek:

fuzzy dunlop

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Exactly! We have one keyboard warrior (and WHERE you post and being a keyboard warrior are not related in any way) trying to bully people who offer an alternative viewpoint on how Waterford is perceived at home and abroad. Would he be so vocal and demeaning face to face??? Hmm...

To you? No problem! You don't get to define what a keyboard warrior is because it suits. And if your so worried about militancy stop going on about it. You are the one broadcasting about it.

fuzzy dunlop

barneystinson wrote: »

Really, where do I describe myself as foolish?

here!

barneystinson wrote: »

No, no, he couldn't get his daily fix of browbeating without someone foolish enough to disagree with him...!

Or are you saying actually agree with me?

barneystinson

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

here!



Or are you saying actually agree with me?

No, I was using rhetoric, you obviously didnt get it

Don't worry about it though.

And I do disagree with you.

Took you long enough to dredge that back up, were you sitting up on a hilltop honing your (keyboard) warrior skills?!

There are people who have that impression of Waterford, they may not be the people that matter, and they may not have any part to play in jobs coming or not coming to Waterford. As I said, I'm just talking about man on the street impressions, of people not from here.

PM me and I'll give you a spin to work with me some morning and introduce you to a couple