benl Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Boredom I was just mentioning it as a polite correction to your assertion, but you're right it makes no difference, much in the same way if he was born here. I'm sorry I don't mean to lump everyone into the category, but I do sense it is becoming more and more of a pervasive theme in comments, which i regrettable when you think how many news stories and truly worthwhile contributions this website has made over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benl Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 I'm sorry Boredom, I take it back. I confused usernames amidst the quick replies and the last one I had read was the sarcastic one. Either way, it's not a personal vendetta, I'm not here to tar names. Edited to correct my facts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Mr Lambden is a very nasty and dangerous individual, he purports to represent the general public who in the large have never heard of him. He gets his name in print and on M.R. by opposing change and by being controversial, he has few if any supporters. This man is dangerous as people are unaware of his ability to see any point of view but his own and when he is challenged he is filled with vile spite. I do not know where he comes from but it may be a good idea for him to return and leave the running of the Island to people who love it and do not put their own pretensions ideas ahead of the common good. To be frank he is a shit and should be ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benl Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 I'd be more inclined to believe you Sid if you classified what made him 'nasty and dangerous'. He has objected to a planning proposal (with many others - whether or not this is the representative view I can not say) and complained about Stu Peters and even if you don't agree with the content he has at least made public his complaint and put his name to it, the same will happen if he is found by the regulator to be wrong. Need I otherwise say the only thing they have directly rallied for is that the horse trams not be put on the walk way. I think everyone would agree the fabric of the promenade is in poor condition. I'm sure his opinion is one sided but challenge it with substance not vitriol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hissingsid Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 Benl you are so obviously a relation or have a facination for him your posts do not really hold water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benl Posted April 21, 2016 Share Posted April 21, 2016 I am Sid, yes, and I make no effort to conceal it. I also make a point of not taking either side on here, only suggesting some decorum in what could so easily be a reasoned debate. I will of course be more than willing to either retract or justify any statement you feel and consequentially prove to be unfounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauder Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 A reasoned debate is not what Lamden is about,all he requires is his own way like a petulant child who moves in on some other childs playground and wishes to take control of someone else's toys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tweek Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Sounds ideal Chief Minister material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 I am Sid, yes, and I make no effort to conceal it. I also make a point of not taking either side on here, only suggesting some decorum in what could so easily be a reasoned debate. I will of course be more than willing to either retract or justify any statement you feel and consequentially prove to be unfounded. You are right about the vitriol. It is crazy. However, the complaint IS nonsense, the regulations he has quoted do not support it and he would be well advised to withdraw it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhtred Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Very late in the day, (sorry) I've read the complaint and listened to the broadcast. In my opinion, Mr. Lambden's complaint has very little substance indeed. I fear he runs the risk of making himself look foolish, which would be a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benl Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Thanks for all the replies, and thank you for being so reasoned. As I say, I am not going to pass comment on the merits of either argument, but hopefully both sides can reflect and learn from this and both Manx Radio and democratic processes in general (freedom of speech etc) can show themselves in the best light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parchedpeas Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Also late to this. The complaint is ridiculous. Manx Radio NEWS is obliged to be neutral. And, by and large, it is. The rest of their output is a series of individuals talking about what they think. Asking them to not have an opinion or to be 'balanced' would reduce the content to little more than press releases and music. If someone says they liked Prince, they do not also have to say that the liked Lionel Richie, Peter Gabriel, Jack Johnson and Pink aswell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwell Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Thanks for all the replies, and thank you for being so reasoned. As I say, I am not going to pass comment on the merits of either argument, but hopefully both sides can reflect and learn from this and both Manx Radio and democratic processes in general (freedom of speech etc) can show themselves in the best light. Which is exactly what Stu Peters is not allowed apparently........................................ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey boy Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 The complaint is ridiculous. Stu often expresses opinions that I don't agree with, but he's very good at doing it in a self demeaning, diplomatic & friendly way - only an idiot would take offense. You've got to remember it's his job to get a reaction, a phone in show is no good without contributors and adding his opinion to the plain facts that he presents at the beginning of every topic is a good way of starting a debate. I've never presented a radio phone in show, but I have little doubt that Stu makes it sound a lot easier than it is. Luckily he's complained to the Communications Commission, a regulator so fucking useless that they are happy to grant a licenced monopoly to a company so shite that if you want a phone line installed you've got to wait two months & pay over £100 for them to connect a line that's already there. Stu will probably get a pay rise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauder Posted April 22, 2016 Share Posted April 22, 2016 Luckily for most,he's just another insignificant non entity with less charisma than suicide by carbon monoxide. Though it's fine to criticise government spending taxpayers money when this particular individual happens to work for a Swiss company who's business is to help the HNW types like myself to keep tax payments to a minimum as part of his remit. I sense a hankering for glory is being sought and an incredible need to be liked. Quite pathetic really,but not to worry,he's getting on now,so death will be sooner rather than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.