Seemingly trivial things that intrigue you

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Why people will spend ages writing emails or whats apps when the whole thing can be done in a 2 minute call.

Lesson learned the hard way decades ago.
If it's not written down and recorded then it never happened.

The summary follow up email covers that.

If you're having an email exchange that's more than 3 emails in total, you should have had a phone call.

*Normalise phone calls, so that people no longer feel obliged to do pleasantries. You can get so much done in such a short amount of time*

I guess you don't have a minimum of 6 years liability if one of your recruits turns out to be a bit rubbish. Phone calls are for stuff you don't want to write down.

Have the call, follow up with one email summarising all the key points. The stuff that needs to be written down.

It's the *conversation over email* which is a waste of everyone's time. At this point I'm convinced some people are so engrossed in their own sh!t they can't make time to just thrash it out in 5 minutes.

"But I don't like being disturbed". You work in a team!

First.Aspect

pblakeney said:

I believe Clarkson did a documentary on a similar topic. 😉

I already know I'm not interested enough to suffer watching it.

mrb123

First.Aspect said:

I don't understand the economics of UK farming. For slaughter, a "lamb" (meaning a young adult sheep) goes for about £30. So that's about £15 per lamb per year. You need a lot of lambs to make a living, but the guy around here has a flock of 1000 if he is lucky, but drives a Discovery, employs a couple of lads and has to run 3 quads, a land rover and a tractor.

Anyone explain how that adds up to a living? And of subsidies?

https://cap-payments.defra.gov.uk/Search.aspx

You can find out how much farmers near you are receiving in subsidies here...

Pross

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

pblakeney said:

rick_chasey said:

Why people will spend ages writing emails or whats apps when the whole thing can be done in a 2 minute call.

Lesson learned the hard way decades ago.
If it's not written down and recorded then it never happened.

The summary follow up email covers that.

If you're having an email exchange that's more than 3 emails in total, you should have had a phone call.

*Normalise phone calls, so that people no longer feel obliged to do pleasantries. You can get so much done in such a short amount of time*

I guess you don't have a minimum of 6 years liability if one of your recruits turns out to be a bit rubbish. Phone calls are for stuff you don't want to write down.

Have the call, follow up with one email summarising all the key points. The stuff that needs to be written down.

It's the *conversation over email* which is a waste of everyone's time. At this point I'm convinced some people are so engrossed in their own sh!t they can't make time to just thrash it out in 5 minutes.

"But I don't like being disturbed". You work in a team!

Believe it or not a lot of people are working on more than one job at a time. If you have a head down in one project it gets annoying to be taking calls every 10 minutes on your other projects. If someone sends an email with their query you can give it the intention it deserves once you’ve finished what you are doing.

It also means you have a chance to check details edits replying. Maybe the mode of communication varies depending on industry sector. I get phone calls asking me things where I will need to open and check various drawings to make sure I’m not giving incorrect information or may be asked for an alternative solution due to a site problem. It’s not good trying to do that while someone is hanging on the phone pressuring you for an answer as costly mistakes get made.

focuszing723

...

mully79

OH doesn't even type WhatsApp messages. Just sends a voice clip instead.

morstar

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

First.Aspect

It's an astonishing case. If there was a halfway decent opposition they would be asking if there was any way, under the pending legislation, a trans woman could legitimately be excluded from a women's prison without breaking the law.

As it is, it is just Douglas Ross asking the questions, and he's a bit of an intellectual pigmy. Labour won't give snp a hard time because they voted for it in order to virtue signal.

But as it is, the SNP are making the law up as they go along, pretty much without challenge.

briantrumpet

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

The trans rapist is going to "go through some things", I suspect.

Cases like that can only poison an already very difficult debate.

rick_chasey

It’s exactly what the critics of some of the accommodations
have been saying will happen which is why it’s such big news.

rjsterry

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

Why not go the whole hog and have mixed gender prisons.

And if not, you have to then work out what you do with men who lie to be treated as women.

First.Aspect

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

. <------




<---------- you

rjsterry

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

. <------




<---------- you</p>

More of a reaction to the leveraging of the situation by some people. I don't know much about the Scottish piece of legislation, but I'm fairly sure overturning it on the basis of a single fairly extreme case is not a good way to make law either.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

Why not go the whole hog and have mixed gender prisons.

And if not, you have to then work out what you do with men who lie to be treated as women.

Well obviously this. Just not sure that is in itself a reason to insist a small but significant number of non-criminal people have to formally apply for something that the rest of us take for granted.

First.Aspect

.

rjsterry said:

First.Aspect said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

. <------




<---------- you</p>

More of a reaction to the leveraging of the situation by some people. I don't know much about the Scottish piece of legislation, but I'm fairly sure overturning it on the basis of a single fairly extreme case is not a good way to make law either.

Valid point.

The actual issues seem very nuanced to me, far more so than the press can be bothered to get into, and I fear also for the politicians here who debated it.

With the huge caveat that I don't have a scoobies personally, people with some professional knowledge of brain development tell me its dangerous. As in, 16 year olds aren't adults.

morstar

Don’t get me wrong, I have no idea how you square this circle.

I do think it’s an interesting case. Sturgeons position for the offender to not serve in a female prison seems simultaneously sensible and yet at odds with equality rights for trans people. A subject which is particularly in focus for her right now.

Whilst wgaf about this thug, what about another trans person who commits a minor offence.

pblakeney

morstar said:

Don’t get me wrong, I have no idea how you square this circle.

I do think it’s an interesting case. Sturgeons position for the offender to not serve in a female prison seems simultaneously sensible and yet at odds with equality rights for trans people. A subject which is particularly in focus for her right now.

Whilst wgaf about this thug, what about another trans person who commits a minor offence.

I'm guessing that the offence of rape is the driver in this instance.
Possibly/probably not relevant otherwise?

rick_chasey

It’s exactly what the critics of the trans laws ha

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

Why not go the whole hog and have mixed gender prisons.

And if not, you have to then work out what you do with men who lie to be treated as women.

Well obviously this. Just not sure that is in itself a reason to insist a small but significant number of non-criminal people have to formally apply for something that the rest of us take for granted.

Sure but the same logic applies to all places where there is gender segregation, right?

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

It’s exactly what the critics of the trans laws ha

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

Why not go the whole hog and have mixed gender prisons.

And if not, you have to then work out what you do with men who lie to be treated as women.

Well obviously this. Just not sure that is in itself a reason to insist a small but significant number of non-criminal people have to formally apply for something that the rest of us take for granted.

Sure but the same logic applies to all places where there is gender segregation, right?

Not thought enough about it, but broadly I think so. In this specific scenario, I can't see why the duty of care for other inmates shouldn't take precedence and the prisoner gets put in whichever prison is deemed most appropriate on a case by case basis.

drhaggis

Where would a man that raped men be sent? I doubt it'd be a female-only prison. Of course, things are a lot subtler here, as this person may be having all the benefits of testosterone.

rick_chasey

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

It’s exactly what the critics of the trans laws ha

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

Why not go the whole hog and have mixed gender prisons.

And if not, you have to then work out what you do with men who lie to be treated as women.

Well obviously this. Just not sure that is in itself a reason to insist a small but significant number of non-criminal people have to formally apply for something that the rest of us take for granted.

Sure but the same logic applies to all places where there is gender segregation, right?

Not thought enough about it, but broadly I think so. In this specific scenario, I can't see why the duty of care for other inmates shouldn't take precedence and the prisoner gets put in whichever prison is deemed most appropriate on a case by case basis.

Right.

Problem is in other gender segregated settings you don’t have a court, nor the time, to establish things on a case-by-case basis.

I can’t really see a solution, as either the trans lot lose out or women do.

It’s a troubling zero sum game which is why I think the debate is quite so toxic.

morstar

pblakeney said:

morstar said:

Don’t get me wrong, I have no idea how you square this circle.

I do think it’s an interesting case. Sturgeons position for the offender to not serve in a female prison seems simultaneously sensible and yet at odds with equality rights for trans people. A subject which is particularly in focus for her right now.

Whilst wgaf about this thug, what about another trans person who commits a minor offence.

I'm guessing that the offence of rape is the driver in this instance.
Possibly/probably not relevant otherwise?

I agree. But it drives a tank through the equality principles that are trying to be established.

The logical conclusion is that a trans woman is not the same as a genetic woman in all cases. This is also where many sports bodies appear to be landing. This is not the conclusion we are being told we should come to.

There has to be a grown up debate on the topic. It needs to be clear where trans and genetics are and are not distinct. That will take time. But to start with, you have to agree that legally, there is a differentiator.

If you don’t accept there is a difference, how can you send a woman to a male prison?

morstar

BBC had some stats regarding prison population and trans inmates.
It was a high proportion of the small number begin their transition once charged.

Read into that what you will.

rjsterry

morstar said:

BBC had some stats regarding prison population and trans inmates.
It was a high proportion of the small number begin their transition once charged.

Read into that what you will.

Did it give a breakdown of what crimes those transitioning after charging had been charged with?

pblakeney

morstar said:

pblakeney said:

morstar said:

Don’t get me wrong, I have no idea how you square this circle.

I do think it’s an interesting case. Sturgeons position for the offender to not serve in a female prison seems simultaneously sensible and yet at odds with equality rights for trans people. A subject which is particularly in focus for her right now.

Whilst wgaf about this thug, what about another trans person who commits a minor offence.

I'm guessing that the offence of rape is the driver in this instance.
Possibly/probably not relevant otherwise?

I agree. But it drives a tank through the equality principles that are trying to be established.

...

If you are asking me then I have some unpopular views.
Mostly that I'll leave it to those who care.

Jezyboy

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

It’s exactly what the critics of the trans laws ha

rjsterry said:

rick_chasey said:

rjsterry said:

morstar said:

This makes an awkward situation.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64413242

I’m sure you could make a strong argument the transition was solely to get yourself in a womens prison. Would be a sorry situation to be put in a women’s prison for committing crimes against women when you were a male.

But then it blows an enormous hole in way the trans laws are evolving.

Tbh, if I was in politics, half the stuff that came across my desk, I’d just be thinking who the hell makes this stuff up.

I find it odd that apparently no-one can conceive of a cis woman possibly sexually assaulting another woman. I mean it's almost as if the lack of safety in prisons is the issue rather than gender.

Why not go the whole hog and have mixed gender prisons.

And if not, you have to then work out what you do with men who lie to be treated as women.

Well obviously this. Just not sure that is in itself a reason to insist a small but significant number of non-criminal people have to formally apply for something that the rest of us take for granted.

Sure but the same logic applies to all places where there is gender segregation, right?

Not thought enough about it, but broadly I think so. In this specific scenario, I can't see why the duty of care for other inmates shouldn't take precedence and the prisoner gets put in whichever prison is deemed most appropriate on a case by case basis.

Right.

Problem is in other gender segregated settings you don’t have a court, nor the time, to establish things on a case-by-case basis.

I can’t really see a solution, as either the trans lot lose out or women do.

It’s a troubling zero sum game which is why I think the debate is quite so toxic.

As you started to say, it's exactly what one side of the argument kept warning against.

It feels like either, it isn't a significant issue, and thus this case is very fortuitous for the "anti" side of the argument. Or that the pro side of the argument has perhaps underestimated the risks.

If roughly 1% of the population is trans, and that population is evenly spread among prisoners, that's around 800 trans prisoners. that's feels like enough for tabloids to make a story out of regularly.

This is then all combined with a criminal justice system that seems to be quite flawed.

First.Aspect

Personally I'm more worried that the First Minister is making up law and policy that applies to it on the hoof, with respect to individual cases. She shouldn't have any role whatsoever in the day-to-day operation of the legal system.

It is all alarmingly tin-pot.

rjsterry

That last sentence is something of an understatement. The 800 number is roughly the same as the number of officers being investigated for sexual or domestic abuse in a single police force. Add on a court system that means cases routinely take years to come to trial and I'm not sure this one case is quite the gotcha that the anti-trans gang think it is.

First.Aspect

The issue is not anti- or pro- anything, it is that the SNP and its opponents have framed the debate in these terms.

How on earth has it become that you are either feminist and anti-trans, or pro-trans and anti-feminist?

WTF is going in in Scotland?