WE WANT OUR MAIL BACK:

[TrueBlueTerrier]

BTW, if you are so worried about the tenant being a certain type of person, I hope you are prepared for the impending defamation case against you when she is informed about your on-line character assassination of her.

Who's going to tell her pray tell?

A simple google search of her name, by the woman concerned. There are plenty of warnings on here that we are a PUBLIC site, we ban only trouble makers and spammers, anyone else is welcome, including this woman.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

There is nothing to stop me or any other Member of this Forum who believes in non discriminatory acts from informing the victim of their discrimination.

Oh and just in case you wondered, all CWU Reps have been trained and signed up to the above!

Unfortunately for you there isn't a UK equivalent of the old GDR Stasi or Rumanian Securitate, otherwise I'm sure you'd be banging down the doors of the recruitment centre.
My opinions, whether you consider them jocular stereotypes or not, will not hurt or maim any of my colleagues or innocent kids out in the street.
As for a 'case' it beggars belief that having already attacked two postmen and her having been subject to an order regarding the dog, the same thing has been reported again since by postmen which in my opinion is far more deserving of action.
Sooner or later there will be an incident far more serious than a couple of daft lines on a chat forum.

But hey! Don't let that worry you, after all the PC-Nazis have far more important priorities.

No but there is the "Code of Business standards" which adherence or compliance of (as appropriate) is contractual. Page 30 says

All individuals working for Royal Mail Group must:

Adopt the guiding principles of the Equality and Fairness Policy.
Not discriminate or encourage others to discriminate.

Now whether or not people on here think you have been guilty of discrimination is actually beside the point, though everyone SHOULD challenge behaviour they think is unacceptable. The most important point is that if your manager or any manager has recognised you then the action they take, and the action you took that caused their response is beyond the responsibility of RoyalMailChat, and ultimately falls upon your shoulders.

As ever the rules I use when I post on here is only to post what I can defend, and what I would say in an interview with my boss. If you wouldn't say it to your boss don't say it on here.

The next argument people use in this situation is "I will deny its me, or that someone hijacked my account". That defense has never worked because the burden of proof that any disciplinary has to apply is that in all reasonable circumstances, a reasonable person would come to the same conclusion, and that the subsequent disciplinary action is also reasonable.

[Lounge Lizard]

No doubt owned by some benefits-dependent fat MacDonalds-bloated slapper with 3 kids by different fathers, all of whom eff and jeff from the age of 3 onwards.

Those type of comments are nothing short of disgraceful!

Tell me that if I'm wrong. Overweight yes, but not obese. Simple, well judge by the photo. Admittedly no MacDonalds detritus as the house got it biannual clean no doubt before the press took the photo. Kids wouldn't be shown in the photo obviously. Benefits? I'd bet a few quid I am correct.

You're Wrong

You said 'No doubt' - I'm doubting it, instead of discrimination back it up!

You said, 'MacDonalds-bloated', are there a take-away related items in that photo to back it up?
You said, 'slapper', is there anything in that photo which backs up that claim?
You said, '3 kids', are there any children or child related items in that photo to back that up? ...and she only has two children BTW
Regarding the incorrect children claim you then said, that they were at least three years old, each have different fathers and swear

BTW, if you are so worried about the tenant being a certain type of person, I hope you are prepared for the impending defamation case against you when she is informed about your on-line character assassination of her.

No, there no take-away related items in that photo but the can of pop in the photo of Winston at the window might suggest that Hayley doesn't enjoy the healthiest of diets yet the spray bottle of cleaner surely indicates that she's quite house proud.

[Bahia Feliz]

BTW, if you are so worried about the tenant being a certain type of person, I hope you are prepared for the impending defamation case against you when she is informed about your on-line character assassination of her.

Who's going to tell her pray tell?

A simple google search of her name, by the woman concerned. There are plenty of warnings on here that we are a PUBLIC site, we ban only trouble makers and spammers, anyone else is welcome, including this woman.

So,If the lady in question was to make a complaint about a comment made by someone on this site,would they be able to trace someone by a user name?

[fishtank]

So,If the lady in question was to make a complaint about a comment made by someone on this site,would they be able to trace someone by a user name?

No but it would bring unwanted criticism of this site which isn't fair on the guys that run it and if she made enough noise RM would probably feel the need to get involved since it's obviously an RM employee who is throwing around the abuse and it is possible if you've made enough posts that you might have given enough clues for RM to track down your identity.

[hampshireman]

BTW, if you are so worried about the tenant being a certain type of person, I hope you are prepared for the impending defamation case against you when she is informed about your on-line character assassination of her.

Who's going to tell her pray tell?

A simple google search of her name, by the woman concerned. There are plenty of warnings on here that we are a PUBLIC site, we ban only trouble makers and spammers, anyone else is welcome, including this woman.

So,If the lady in question was to make a complaint about a comment made by someone on this site,would they be able to trace someone by a user name?

IP address ;possibly?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

BTW, if you are so worried about the tenant being a certain type of person, I hope you are prepared for the impending defamation case against you when she is informed about your on-line character assassination of her.

Who's going to tell her pray tell?

A simple google search of her name, by the woman concerned. There are plenty of warnings on here that we are a PUBLIC site, we ban only trouble makers and spammers, anyone else is welcome, including this woman.

So,If the lady in question was to make a complaint about a comment made by someone on this site,would they be able to trace someone by a user name?

Nope simple deduction. As an exercise in how simple it can be, if you have been truthful in your posts (and I hope not completely so) then I can already see you performed overtime on a duty next to yours over Christmas, and 2 hours docket on 12 Dec 2014, in 2016 you will have completed 15 years. Your office voted in Long and shorts in 2013.

So anyone who suspects who you are only has to look at your posts and can not only narrow down the office but also down to a few possible posties. Its that easy.

PERSEC.

[Bahia Feliz]

BTW, if you are so worried about the tenant being a certain type of person, I hope you are prepared for the impending defamation case against you when she is informed about your on-line character assassination of her.

Who's going to tell her pray tell?

A simple google search of her name, by the woman concerned. There are plenty of warnings on here that we are a PUBLIC site, we ban only trouble makers and spammers, anyone else is welcome, including this woman.

So,If the lady in question was to make a complaint about a comment made by someone on this site,would they be able to trace someone by a user name?

Nope simple deduction. As an exercise in how simple it can be, if you have been truthful in your posts (and I hope not completely so) then I can already see you performed overtime on a duty next to yours over Christmas, and 2 hours docket on 12 Dec 2014, in 2016 you will have completed 15 years. Your office voted in Long and shorts in 2013.

So anyone who suspects who you are only has to look at your posts and can not only narrow down the office but also down to a few possible posties. Its that easy.

PERSEC.

Who is this you are talking about TBT because it isn't me!

[Bahia Feliz]

Anyway it wasn't me who said this

Looks an ugly brute (for the sake of clarity - Winston is the one in the foreground).

Or this-

No doubt owned by some benefits-dependent fat MacDonalds-bloated slapper with 3 kids by different fathers, all of whom eff and jeff from the age of 3 onwards.

[TrueBlueTerrier]

Anyway it wasn't me who said this

Looks an ugly brute (for the sake of clarity - Winston is the one in the foreground).

Or this-

No doubt owned by some benefits-dependent fat MacDonalds-bloated slapper with 3 kids by different fathers, all of whom eff and jeff from the age of 3 onwards.

Yep I know you didn't say those things, but what I did post was a generic example to show how easy it is to track people down on here, just from what they post. As I have said before post only what you are prepared to defend in a disciplinary, and even then only post what won't get you sacked.

[Bahia Feliz]

Anyway it wasn't me who said this

Looks an ugly brute (for the sake of clarity - Winston is the one in the foreground).

Or this-

No doubt owned by some benefits-dependent fat MacDonalds-bloated slapper with 3 kids by different fathers, all of whom eff and jeff from the age of 3 onwards.

Yep I know you didn't say those things, but what I did post was a generic example to show how easy it is to track people down on here, just from what they post. As I have said before post only what you are prepared to defend in a disciplinary, and even then only post what won't get you sacked.

Very good points there

[bustedflush]

Anyway it wasn't me who said this

Looks an ugly brute (for the sake of clarity - Winston is the one in the foreground).

Or this-

No doubt owned by some benefits-dependent fat MacDonalds-bloated slapper with 3 kids by different fathers, all of whom eff and jeff from the age of 3 onwards.

Yep I know you didn't say those things, but what I did post was a generic example to show how easy it is to track people down on here, just from what they post. As I have said before post only what you are prepared to defend in a disciplinary, and even then only post what won't get you sacked.

Very good points there

Yes, lesson learned.

Apologies.