"Zille violated Constitution", Public Protector

EADC said:
He refused to engage with you not to engage at all, No one owes anyone an explanation.
Click to expand...
When have I ever been dishonest in my engagements with you. You know me by this point. His decision to do so is irrational.

You're defending the indefensible.
 
porchrat said:
When have I ever been dishonest in my engagements with you. You know me by this point. His decision to do so is irrational.

You're defending the indefensible.
Click to expand...

I was not implying you have been dishonest, It might be irrational but still does not compel any one to engage.

Like a few that rolled on in asking questions that have already answered I engaged then stopped because why repeat it.

I will always defend someones free will.
 
EADC said:
I was not implying you have been dishonest, It might be irrational but still does not compel any one to engage.

Like a few that rolled on in asking questions that have already answered I engaged then stopped because why repeat it.

I will always defend someones free will.
Click to expand...
He claimed his reason for refusing to answer me was that I was not being genuine.

You describe a different situation sir. You had answered the question previously. As far as I'm aware, he has not. Instead he told me the equivalent of "Oh well you should just know what I mean!" and when I politely explained that I didn't and would appreciate some clarity he simply disengaged.

Again, if one isn't here to effectively communicate one's thoughts to others then rather just don't bother being here at all.

The least you could have done is backed up my sincerity. Instead you jump in and go "Yea! He doesn't owe you anything!".

This is a discussion forum. You should be promoting discussion, not supporting the shutting down of it.
 
porchrat said:
He claimed his reason for refusing to answer me was that I was not being genuine.
Click to expand...

That is his take on your question true or not still does not have to engage.

You describe a different situation sir. You had answered the question previously. As far as I'm aware, he has not. Instead he told me the equivalent of "Oh well you should just know what I mean!" and when I politely explained that I didn't and would appreciate some clarity he simply disengaged.
Click to expand...

I dont think there was anything to answer really.

Again, if one isn't here to effectively communicate one's thoughts to others then rather just don't bother being here at all.
Click to expand...

That is your opinion how people use the forum is up to them, If its like the Flat eathers to troll us so be it.

The least you could have done is backed up my sincerity. Instead you jump in and go "Yea! He doesn't owe you anything!".
Click to expand...

I could have done many things but that is what I wanted to say as that was first thing that popped into my head

This is a discussion forum. You should be promoting discussion, not supporting the shutting down of it
Click to expand...

Take everything on its merits but I mostly feel we can decide how we use the forum how we engage.
 
Neat deflection from the face that the EFF brigade is full of crap as usual.
 
EADC said:
That is his take on your question true or not still does not have to engage.
Click to expand...
Indeed he doesn't. It's just not very constructive or rational.


I don't think there was anything to answer really.
Click to expand...
What does he think Zille gained from this?

I think it's a pretty important question if we're talking about a conflict of interest.


That is your opinion how people use the forum is up to them, If its like the Flat eathers to troll us so be it.
Click to expand...
The flat Earthers are honest about it though. You know you're being trolled and choose to engage.

Again this is different to claiming someone is dishonest and refusing to engage.


I could have done many things but that is what I wanted to say as that was first thing that popped into my head

Take everything on its merits but I mostly feel we can decide how we use the forum how we engage.
Click to expand...
That is your choice. I feel it is a poor choice but so be it.
 
porchrat said:
Indeed he doesn't. It's just not very constructive or rational.
Click to expand...

You also got to take into context of who the reply was to.

What does he think Zille gained from this?
I think it's a pretty important question if we're talking about a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

Nothing but she didnt have to gain to expose herself. But it is tricky and I am not 100% on what the ethics code says and how PP used it.

The flat Earthers are honest about it though. You know you're being trolled and choose to engage.
Again this is different to claiming someone is dishonest and refusing to engage.
Click to expand...

Look most of what poeple say is open to interpretation context can get lost.

That is your choice. I feel it is a poor choice but so be it.
Click to expand...

Exactly my choice good or bad doesnt matter.
 
EADC said:
You also got to take into context of who the reply was to.
Click to expand...
Yea. In this case to a person asking an honest question expecting an honest response. As I said, irrational and not constructive.


Nothing but she didnt have to gain to expose herself. But it is tricky and I am not 100% on what the ethics code says and how PP used it.
Click to expand...
Neither am I. The man claims to have answered that question and moved beyond it. I wanted to know what the answer he had reached was.

I didn't ask for your answer. I asked for his. You were telling me that there was nothing to answer, I was pointing out that that is not the case. It is a rational question that is relevant to this thread.


Look most of what poeple say is open to interpretation context can get lost.
Click to expand...
Sure, but we should at least try to be honest and helpful with each other.

I don't mind trolling when it's obvious that someone is trolling. I do however mind being accused of dishonesty and, after clarifying that I'm indeed being sincere, to continue to be rudely ignored. Do you think that sot of behaviour is good behaviour?


Exactly my choice good or bad doesnt matter.
Click to expand...
Well no it matters. It has consequences. You're reinforcing champ's destructive behaviour for example.
 
phaktza said:
Yes all you need to be a success is 150 tablets - most definitely not hard work and dedication :-/

What message is this sending the unemployed and graduating?
Click to expand...
Kick start I never used the word success I don't know if his business is a success or not
 
Sunday Debate | Helen Zille | 23rd December 2018

One point is clearly made: The PP found no evidence of collusion, chasing up tenders, influencing ... all acknowledged by the PP, only that it could be seen to be a conflict of interest.

Just for fun: "Ironically, most of the tablets did not work".
 
Sollie said:
Sunday Debate | Helen Zille | 23rd December 2018

One point is clearly made: The PP found no evidence of collusion, chasing up tenders, influencing ... all acknowledged by the PP, only that it could be seen to be a conflict of interest.

Just for fun: "Ironically, most of the tablets did not work".
Click to expand...
Watched it last night. No mumbling, fumbling, skirting of issues or blame shifting there. Just clear, concise and seemingly nothing to hide imo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X