Code of Conduct

[pineapplemike]

Equity.JPG

Ethics.JPG

prior consent is not consent?

edit: oh it's in the moment, not after the fact, i get it. consent ends when consent ends

the rest of that seems fairly standard although "inclusive" pops out to me as a politically-charged word

[Martin Hash]

Notice how what someone else thinks is abusive behavior has precedence; they get to determine what you say and do, a reversal of responsibility & control. They also get to tell you how to address them, and “consent” is code for second-by-second control of any situation.

[Speaker to Animals]

That's really the only problem I have with it. The language of inclusivity can be used subjectively as well, but in the context of a political leader, one should include the entire electorate (not necessarily agree with them but to consider what they have to say). Yet in terms of inclusivity, democrats hardly intend to honor that. What they really mean is no white men allowed,and they sure as shit do not want to include your voice in the debate if you dissent from their political ideology in a significant way.

Actually it might be interesting to see if they can legally be held accountable to their own code of conduct where it comes to inclusion of conservative, white, and male voices in political discourse.

[The Conservative]

The idea is to prevent violent crime.
Just waiting for violent crime to happen leads to violent crime.

You want to imprison people because they might commit violent crime?

No. I want to stop people inciting violent crime.
30 years of sectarian violence is enough.
Chanting about the Battle of the Boyne to a bunch of Catholics is incitement.

Your country has a long way to go to do that.

[TheReal_ND]

Inclusitivity is code for anti-white

[Ex-California]

That's for the ''old firm game'' between Glasgow Rangers and Celtic.
Glasgow is a city divided into Protestants and Catholics much like Belfast.
Violence between rival supporters is often instigated by sectarian chants.

That's where you guys have it backwards, the people who are committing the violence can go to jail, not those saying words

[StCapps]

The idea is to prevent violent crime.
Just waiting for violent crime to happen leads to violent crime.

You want to imprison people because they might commit violent crime?

No. I want to stop people inciting violent crime.
30 years of sectarian violence is enough.
Chanting about the Battle of the Boyne to a bunch of Catholics is incitement.

No it isn't incitement. UK Pre-Crime for the fail.

[Smitty-48]

[Ph64]

UK pre-crime unit on red alert.

Because you can always trust government to get the job done with efficiency and intelligently.



..and you can especially trust them to properly handle obviously racist/bigoted activities by their... canine citizens?



Could you imagine what disastrous consequences could arise if they didn't investigate all these "hate incidents" and instead focused on, I dunno, actual crimes instead?

[Montegriffo]

It's a rail service.
You have to provide a service to cover all routes not just the profitable ones.
When the Royal Mail postal service was privatised the new private companies were not allowed to refuse to deliver to remote Scottish fishing villages because they were unprofitable.
This is why it difficult to close down train routes and stations.
Without regulations private rail companies would shut down all non-profitable routes and we'd have a public transport system failing to provide a service to large numbers of the population.