Rhumsaa

33 minutes ago, 2112 said:

I wonder if the person in question has approached their MHK for advice? MHKs being the Chief Minister and the Farmers Friend. 

I think I heard her speaking on the radio saying she had Alf Cannan sat at her kitchen table trying to help her

23 minutes ago, 747-400 said:

There is always two sides to every story. 

3 sides?

11 minutes ago, Roxanne said:

It’s lockdown by stealth, or, organic lockdown, or circumstantial lockdown.

Whatever, if it’s not government sanctioned, will financial assistance for struggling businesses be made available?

no

which I suppose is the point

same with all the pubs not being open due to staff shortages etc

maybe they sent it to collect their elite hacking unit from a mission

43 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

We've made the World Stage (again).... 😁

 

same as when we had more murders per capita than New York City

19 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Has she made a statement?  Last I heard she had been asked for one. 

Now seen. 

it is unapologetic, unlike how you would have advised

I must admit I was initially unsure why you'd apologise for tweets that were not sent by you but from a hacker but I think your reasoning explained elsewhere of "apologies for the hurt caused by the use of the account by a third party" made sense

Edited to clarify opening comment which didn't make sense

40 minutes ago, FookADoodleDoo said:

It amazes me to why this so called Hacker would respond & block those who commented negatively to HER tweets before she deactivated her account. Why would a hacker do that 🤦‍♀️

to keep the pretense alive?

some next level parodying

3 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

I'm not sure what it's got to do with GTS. Was it a government account? Did I miss that? 

think it was a joke to suggest GTS had become the CIA

Just now, Max Power said:

Pardon my ignorance but who are GTS? Are they the Manx MI5 or GCHQ or something?

they're the Government Technical Support

6 minutes ago, Annoymouse said:

She won’t have much choice if there is the slightest possibility that she’s been hacked and sensitive information could be released, with hackers you tend to work on worst case scenario. Hopefully it won’t have any impact on her business.

if it is her business you'd assume she has some insurance to cover these sorts of events

Just now, FookADoodleDoo said:

Oh she has blocked them.  It’s confirmed on Twitter. It’s nothing new anyway. It’s what she is known for. 

no I was meaning that she made her account private as a result

I'm sure she has been blocking people 

I don't necessarily think that blocking people equals guilt in this case

2 minutes ago, FookADoodleDoo said:

Someone on her new Twitter page asked whether she had called the police and as a result she blocked them and made her account private. It speaks volumes. 

I think you're taking two not necessarily connected events and drawing a coinclusion

1 minute ago, FookADoodleDoo said:

If you were reading the posts and her comments in retaliation as it was happening last night then you will understand. She took herself off Twitter because of the back lash but failed to see why people were angry with her. She’s done it before.  If she was truly hacked then she would be calling the police. 

she might have called the police? time will tell on that front

10 minutes ago, FookADoodleDoo said:

And how did this so called Hacker know about her father & ancestors which was mentioned in the same tweets? Not to mention the usual outbursts on her gripe with the silencing of women? This is kindly meant, but please wake up. 

well she's been pretty public about a lot of info (dunno if this is part of it as I didn't follow her) so could be easily obtained by someone being malicious

3 minutes ago, TheTeapot said:

This is probably one of those times when I should keep my thoughts to myself.

if only others followed your lead

3 minutes ago, Gladys said:

Oh, I see.  Sorry, humour failure there!  

quick delete your account before it's too late

2 hours ago, Sheldon said:

Depending who you are, you may not have to look - or speculate - too hard. Surely this can't be right?

for me this is the most inappropriate part - to infer that she has this level of private and sensitive info is very poor

19 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

Reading @rachomicstwitter it seems so.

I think she could probably have left it a day or two before going on a public rant but hey ho

We want cheaper housing but no more new houses to be built be developers on fields

We want pristine roads but the car tax to go down

We want cheaper services but don't want foreigners

etc

amazing stuff

Just now, Non-Believer said:

Do you have a link please PB?

he's given you the date and it's DOI you could probably find it yourself

sounds like bullshit to me

Old NB there knows some people who said over 100 had been purchased

2 minutes ago, piebaps said:

55 according to an FOI published on 23/11/21

3 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I believe that there has certainly been around that number purchased, yes. A couple of BV employees I'm acquainted with quote numbers in excess of that.

thought you were a non-believer?

2 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

In April last year a Tynwald question elicited the information that the @ 100-strong minibus fleet had been purchased without Tynwald knowledge or sanction.

are there 100 minibuses under Bus Vannin's control?

19 minutes ago, Roger Mexico said:

Conjecture of course, though you must admit there have been rumours for some time.  A lot may not even be favouritism so much as choosing a standard supplier that they already have contacts with.  Rather than shopping around for the solution that does the job required, they get an existing supplier to contort something that's in a similar sort of area into the intended use.  You see this with software sometimes (not just from DoI).

I have no information on the subject, just that you are usually quite a well researched and factual contributor I wanted to make sure I understood the origin of your post

2 hours ago, Roger Mexico said:

But actually chose the one that cost £28,700, so those that believe government always picks the cheapest are clearly wrong.  What actually happens of course is that Longworth gives the contract or position to some favoured mate and fixes the criteria so only they qualify (probably by copying them straight out the brochure). 

is that based on knowledge or conjecture?