Originally posted by Cliphead
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
A point worth debating
Collapse
X
-
-
-
I thought it was only DA who liked to mass debate about Mrs Thatcher.Originally posted by mudskipper View PostNothing wrong with a mass debate on a Friday night.While you're waiting, read the free novel we sent you. It's a Spanish story about a guy named 'Manual.'Comment
-
get yer t1ts ootOriginally posted by mudskipper View PostNothing wrong with a mass debate on a Friday night.
(\__/)
(>'.'<)
("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to WorkComment
-
What if the "positive support" is for someone nasty (purely hypothetically and with no reference to anyone living or dead of course)?Originally posted by DodgyAgent View PostIs a show of positive support as offensive as a statement of nastiness, where a person is working in a position of responsibility that above all else requires impartiality?

Comment
-
-
It's rather like the official statements from the police, headmaster, football coach et al about the poor child slain by a couple of 'random' rounds in a drive-by shooting, "pillar of the community", "wonderful pupil", "a lad with great talent". Nothing about the crack dealing and the probability that street crime will show a sudden dip with his absence. . . hypothetically speaking speaking of courseOriginally posted by Peoplesoft bloke View PostWhat if the "positive support" is for someone nasty (purely hypothetically and with no reference to anyone living or dead of course)?Comment
-
I'm afraid I started a bit early. Sorry.Originally posted by mudskipper View PostNothing wrong with a mass debate on a Friday night.
To addtess Dodgy's point - yes, it can be. But if you are going to put your opinions on social media, and you can be identified, then don't be surprised if it bites you on the arse.
About 10 bouquets at the shrine earlier, btw
+50 Xeno Geek Points
Come back Toolpusher, scotspine, Voodooflux.Pogle
As for the rest of you - DILLIGAF
Purveyor of fine quality smut since 2005
CUK Olympic University Challenge Champions 2010/2012
Comment
-
this seems rather aptOriginally posted by mudskipper View PostNothing wrong with a mass debate on a Friday night.
You must spread some around before giving it to mudskipper again.merely at clientco for the entertainmentComment
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Why contractors keep putting off their pension (and why I'm one of them) Today 02:43
- HMRC loan charge settlement offer: 3 things to check before you sign Yesterday 07:41
- HMRC standstill agreements extended to 72 months: why the term's doubled, and what to check before signing Jul 31 05:53
- Who owns the loans? Inside the mystery of the loan charge recall scandal Jul 30 06:20
- Umbrella company winding-up petitions in 2026: the practical guide for contractors Jul 29 05:29
- Payments on Account deadline: what contractors must do before July 31st — maybe for the final few times Jul 28 08:01
- Andy Burnham's first 100 days: five things contractors need from the new PM Jul 27 00:53
- Starmer vs Burnham on housing: What their rival plans mean for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- Burnham's housing vision vs. Starmer's home-buying reforms: what it means for your contractor mortgage Jul 22 00:59
- In Khalil v Innovate Transport, a limited company contractor wasn’t a worker and was on £2.30 — not £230 Jul 21 07:58

Comment