Hi there!

  • 0 Posts
  • 278 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle


  • It’s relevant, yes, but not the center of every single topic or event they is happening or exists anywhere.

    Go online however and you’d think it were.

    The bigger problem is their assumption that their country is the “default” country. Discussing something highly specific to your nation, or posting a news article covering a topic that is only relevant within your nation? You need to provide the context of what country you’re talking about, otherwise people might be confused or waste their time reading something irrelevant to them. Over and over.

    unless it’s about the USA of course, then you don’t need to give any context at all because of course the only people they use the Internet are Americans, and obviously the only country worth talking about is the 🇺🇸 US of A! 🇺🇸

    This is highly encouraged in places like Reddit, where communities like /r/news or /r/politics are actually local national subreddits just for the USA, but because they’re special little darlings they use the format that should be reserved for all news and political discussion, rather than a more appropriate and descriptive title like /r/usanews or /r/usapolitics, which would actually be… you know… descriptive and helpful.

    That’s not even mentioning the number of times some random person has used code/abbreviation to describe where they are to lend context to a conversation, but failed to take into account that people outside of your country don’t know your local regional internal place names.

    Oh, you’re from ML? OH? TA? Great, that provides precisely zero information because those aren’t country name abbreviations. Oh, you’re from London which is all the context you think I need? Okay, I know Lo…oh, London… Texas? 🤦‍♀️

    So many wonderful people in the USA, so many fantastic people who don’t have any of the traits I’ve described, I just wish the ones strutting around acting like they’re the only country in the world and on the internet would open their eyes to how that sort of toxic personality trait looks to, and affects others :-(


  • Makes sense, we pay our licence fee for our public service, why should people abroad get for free what we have to pay for?

    I was happy with the current arrangement of adverts supporting the service use abroad, but if it has to migrate to a subscription model to meet modern demands then that’s the way it is.

    I wouldn’t go to another country and ask them to make one of their government’s national public services free for me to use, after all.








  • But why? Why make them scared they’ll lose their jobs at any moment Vs feeling secure?

    If they’re scared, they’ll be seeking better employment, applying for other jobs whilst working this highly unstable one. Probably reduced productivity too, I wouldn’t be as productive under that sort of negative environment.

    Make them feel valued and secure though and they won’t leave, there’ll be less workplace issues for you to have to deal with, and they’ll work harder.

    Unless you see them as completely disposable because the law won’t touch you and there will always be desperate people to fill those positions at any given time, fear is a ridiculous thing to want to instill in your workforce.



  • You say they, not including yourself.

    You’re a member of the rich ruling class, then?

    It’s an interesting perspective that working class teenagers brought this on themselves.

    They generally seem quite restricted in their agency and impact, indeed they are usually the most vocal and proactive age group for bringing about positive change, but the incumbent oppressive system of late stage capitalism (not any one individual, group or organisation, but the collected interests and power of the ruling class put through the lens of capitalism) resists that change with great strength.








  • They’re not wrong though, assuming they’re in the UK and/or their contract agrees a minimum of two weeks notice, as is standard.

    This applies both ways. I expect this employee would be angry if their employer breached their contract to sack them immediately without this notice, but if the employee breaches those same terms of their agreed contract that’s…okay? No.

    Regardless of their feelings, it’s very unprofessional, petty even, and depending on how litigious and unhappy with them their employer is, not a very smart idea.

    There are many edge cases where things must be looked at differently of course (someone resigning over harassment at work would not wish to remain there for a fortnight serving their notice for example), but this must be discussed and agreed upon, because again, it deviates from the legally binding contractual agreement they both signed.

    This employee, regardless of any legitimate grievances, in this communication is unprofessional, petty, and frankly childish.

    While I don’t know the story behind their falling out, I suspect the employer will be glad to see them go. I wouldn’t want them working for me, or even work with them as a colleague. They sound awful.