[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]Named and shamed, tsk tsk..
Why don't you stick up a few posters of him to increase the embarrassment even further...
If you worked for my company, Irving, if that's yer real name, you'd get done for harrassment...
In general terms I have some sympathy for your stance.
However in this instance plenty of warnings were issued and from what has been said the poster has allegedly logged in regularly yet has made no attempt to explain his/her non-payment either publically or by whisper.
Should Mr Irving or anybody else be out of pocket because of people not keeping their promises or at least not having the courtesy to explain why they have not paid?
I sense this a "last resort" in an attempt to provoke some sort of response.
I'm sure he has had plenty of 'warnings' as you put it, still no need to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate' on a forum, especially over a private matter...
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]I'm sure he has had plenty of 'warnings' as you put it, still no need to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate' on a forum, especially over a private matter...
It's not a private matter, RedZed - lots of us signed up on here to contribute to the shirt sponsorship and all the rest of us have paid.
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]I'm sure he has had plenty of 'warnings' as you put it, still no need to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate' on a forum, especially over a private matter...
It's not a private matter, RedZed - lots of us signed up on here to contribute to the shirt sponsorship and all the rest of us have paid.
Ok then, is it really necessary to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate on a forum' regardless as to whether it is a private/public matter/manner...?
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]I'm sure he has had plenty of 'warnings' as you put it, still no need to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate' on a forum, especially over a private matter...
It's not a private matter, RedZed - lots of us signed up on here to contribute to the shirt sponsorship and all the rest of us have paid.
Ok then, is it really necessary to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate on a forum' regardless as to whether it is a private/public matter/manner...?
I would tot up all the money raised, let everyone know how much was raised, thank everyone involved and send the dosh off to wherever it is to be sent, end of...
I certainly wouldn't post spiteful and vindictive comments about anyone who failed to cough up, could be a thousand and one reasons why they hadn't paid, just because I was unaware of one of those reasons wouldn't give me the right to spit my dummy out and slag off a fellow forumite, but that's just me...
I think it is rude and inconsiderate if he has never once replied and if there are reasons, why he has not paid a simple whipser, of sorry but count me out would have done the trick.
Then perhaps it would have been a good idea for the person to have contacted Henry, explain that s/he was no longer in a position to pay, as we all know, these things can happen. Then Henry could have invited other contributors and there would have been no problem. Suspect that Henry has enough on his plate without spending hours chasing money. He organised shirt sponsorship on our behalf, if someone couldn't pay, for whatever reason, s/he only had to be courteous and let Henry know. Others could then have stepped in to help out. sorted, no hassle.
I'm not arguing the semantics of the case, sure, there are many ways anyone could have dealt with it or have responded, these are all besides the point...
The point I'm making is that it is totally unnecessary to publicly humiliate someone in the way it has been done here....
Putting alleged bad debtors names in shop windows was made illegal years ago, check out section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, it's an offence to publish debt matters if someone "Harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation"...
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]I'm sure he has had plenty of 'warnings' as you put it, still no need to publicly call someone 'rude and inconsiderate' on a forum, especially over a private matter...
I believe AFKA ended up out of pocket from this last year and as a result of this he opted not to be in charge of it this year. Henry kindly stepped up and took the burden and is rightly pissed off at the lack of payment or response.
I personally wouldn't have been so polite if - after god knows how many requests and reminders as have appeared on here - I was still being ignored.....Mr Markive would be minus a kneecap!
[cite]Posted By: RedZed333[/cite]The point I'm making is that it is totally unnecessary to publicly humiliate someone in the way it has been done here....
Had this come from anyone else then i would pay a bit of attention to it. The fact it has come from a long standing 'troll' of this board, who openly states elsewhere he only pops onto here to wind people up, and who i know has been posting elsewhere personal attacks on Henry Irving over a number of years, means i will take it with a pinch of salt. And i'm presuming HI is as well by not replying.
For the record for everyone else's benefits, a number of people have made a number of different attempts to contact non-payers in relation to this. As i've stated previously, i have personally done a number of different charity, sponsorship or prize collections on here over the years, and without fail have been knocked for every single one, and had to spend weeks and months chasing and re-chasing some people.
I wasn't going to do the sponsorship again this year, but HI kindly offered to stump up and do the collecting and chasing. With that in mind, we insisted that payments would need to be made quicker than they were before, and that this time the people who say they will pay, and don't, get named as a last resort. Hopefully it will act as a deterrent in future, because it would be a shame to stop doing these sort of things just because we get let down by individuals.
Comments
Is he Nathan, is he Nathan - Is he Nathan in disguise!
sorry - couldn't resist!
Why don't you stick up a few posters of him to increase the embarrassment even further...
If you worked for my company, Irving, if that's yer real name, you'd get done for harrassment...
In general terms I have some sympathy for your stance.
However in this instance plenty of warnings were issued and from what has been said the poster has allegedly logged in regularly yet has made no attempt to explain his/her non-payment either publically or by whisper.
Should Mr Irving or anybody else be out of pocket because of people not keeping their promises or at least not having the courtesy to explain why they have not paid?
I sense this a "last resort" in an attempt to provoke some sort of response.
It's not a private matter, RedZed - lots of us signed up on here to contribute to the shirt sponsorship and all the rest of us have paid.
How would you do things differently?
I certainly wouldn't post spiteful and vindictive comments about anyone who failed to cough up, could be a thousand and one reasons why they hadn't paid, just because I was unaware of one of those reasons wouldn't give me the right to spit my dummy out and slag off a fellow forumite, but that's just me...
The point I'm making is that it is totally unnecessary to publicly humiliate someone in the way it has been done here....
Putting alleged bad debtors names in shop windows was made illegal years ago, check out section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, it's an offence to publish debt matters if someone "Harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation"...
Go on Markive, sue him...
I believe AFKA ended up out of pocket from this last year and as a result of this he opted not to be in charge of it this year. Henry kindly stepped up and took the burden and is rightly pissed off at the lack of payment or response.
I personally wouldn't have been so polite if - after god knows how many requests and reminders as have appeared on here - I was still being ignored.....Mr Markive would be minus a kneecap!
FACT
Had this come from anyone else then i would pay a bit of attention to it. The fact it has come from a long standing 'troll' of this board, who openly states elsewhere he only pops onto here to wind people up, and who i know has been posting elsewhere personal attacks on Henry Irving over a number of years, means i will take it with a pinch of salt. And i'm presuming HI is as well by not replying.
For the record for everyone else's benefits, a number of people have made a number of different attempts to contact non-payers in relation to this. As i've stated previously, i have personally done a number of different charity, sponsorship or prize collections on here over the years, and without fail have been knocked for every single one, and had to spend weeks and months chasing and re-chasing some people.
I wasn't going to do the sponsorship again this year, but HI kindly offered to stump up and do the collecting and chasing. With that in mind, we insisted that payments would need to be made quicker than they were before, and that this time the people who say they will pay, and don't, get named as a last resort. Hopefully it will act as a deterrent in future, because it would be a shame to stop doing these sort of things just because we get let down by individuals.