Easdale threating to sue again!!!

[BrahimHemdani 1]

While I do enjoy being patronised as much as the next man, I have to assure you there's no confusion. Change.org provides the infrastructure and hardware but don't themselves utilise that infrastructure. That infrastructure is put at the disposal of the petitioners for the petitioners to make use of. At the risk of analogying everyone to death, it's a bit like Railtrack (change.org) and the Railway companies. (SoS). Change provide the infrastructure to allow SoS to carry out their business - but the fact remains that the passanger should know where he's going before he gets on the train.

 

I like your last analogy because in a station there tend to be big brightly lit boards telling passengers which trains leave from which platforms and where they are going and there are even announcements sometimes when there are alterations. So it must be quite difficult to get on the wrong train though I daresay it happens.

 

I'll even give you another analogy. There used to be a very nice Flight Attendant who often flew on Continental 17 from Glasgow to Newark who was wont to announce several times before the doors were closed: This is Continental 17 with service to Newark; if Newark is not in your travel plans today please see a Flight Attendant or deplane now. Once the doors were closed he made a further announcement. This is Continental 17 with service to Newark; if Newark isn't your intended destination today,it is now.

[The Real PapaBear 0]

Like any petition I suspect that BM thought it would be delivered in one or more gigantic boxes not in 10,000 individually gift wrapped boxes tied to the legs of a carrier pigeons whether they fly through the air or cyberspace.

 

I don't think even you believe what you are saying now.

 

As Zappa said your point of view is indeed creative but is also entirely illogical.

 

Apropos illogical.

 

Correct me if I go wrong at any point here: You are telling me that you believe BM (and by extension yourself) would think that sending a digital signature on line on the web site of a company who are entirely and only web based would result in this being printed off onto paper, put into boxes and transported to the offices of the recipient?

 

You don't appear, if I may say, to have put a great deal of thought into the logistics or practicality of this; almost as little thought as BM gave when he signed the petition but didn't look at the graphic under the petition.

 

I've repeated the following about four or five times now, and this will be the last because if you don't understand it at the 6th time of asking then you never will.

 

BM clicked the send button on a piece of software which sends an e-mail when clicked. There is no holding pen from which the emails are further forwarded; they are sent immediately and directly. BM is thus the sender.

 

SoS merely provided the platform from which to send the email. They did not send an email on his behalf.

 

The graphic and text at the bottom of the petition should be enough for anyone with their wits about them to understand that the message shown in the graphic would be sent to the recipients shown in the graphic and would include the signatory's name where indicated in the graphic.

Edited May 21, 2014 by The Real PapaBear

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I like your last analogy because in a station there tend to be big brightly lit boards telling passengers which trains leave from which platforms and where they are going and there are even announcements sometimes when there are alterations. So it must be quite difficult to get on the wrong train though I daresay it happens.

 

And yet, unbelievably, still it happens. People look at the big signs in the stations and despite the fact that the graphics are clear as day and easy to understand, they just don't comprehend them. Actually, come to think of it, Very much like the case of the SoS petition, with its clearly signposted recipients and all that.

 

I'll even give you another analogy. There used to be a very nice Flight Attendant who often flew on Continental 17 from Glasgow to Newark who was wont to announce several times before the doors were closed: This is Continental 17 with service to Newark; if Newark is not in your travel plans today please see a Flight Attendant or deplane now. Once the doors were closed he made a further announcement. This is Continental 17 with service to Newark; if Newark isn't your intended destination today,it is now.

 

that's ehm, that's not an analogy, BH - that's an anecdote, mate.

Although it does go someway to explaining why you're making no sense

[The Real PapaBear 0]

I was specifically talking about a particular analogy of yours which didn't make sense though. What I wasn't doing was asking for a new one which does make sense.

 

right...ok.... I'm not sure what's just happened there.

[Zappa 0]

right...ok.... I'm not sure what's just happened there.

 

Let's recap then...

 

But you could not reasonably argue that SoS were the senders any more than you can argue that the Post Office is the sender of every bit of junk mail you receive.

 

That doesn't make any sense PapaBear.

 

au contraire, it makes perfect sense.The Post Office (or Royal Mail for the pedants) have set up a system whereby if you complete a sending action, i.e put a letter in a big red box, they will deliver said letter to intended recipient.

SoS have set up a system whereby if you complete a sending action, i.e. press a button, they will deliver said email to intended recipient

 

Both cases require the sender to send something. Whether the sender knew he was sending is immaterial; the fact remains he is the sender, thereby answering the initial question as to who should be regarded as the sender SoS or the signatory to the petition.

 

You seem to be getting SoS mixed up with the petition platform change.org here for your analogy to work properly because they are the go-between or the carrier like the PO are.

 

Nonetheless, I think you deserve a lot of credit for your alternative viewpoint/explanation here because while it doesn't fix a flawed argument, it's extremely creative and out-of-the-box thinking should always be encouraged!

 

While I do enjoy being patronised as much as the next man, I have to assure you there's no confusion. Change.org provides the infrastructure and hardware but don't themselves utilise that infrastructure. That infrastructure is put at the disposal of the petitioners for the petitioners to make use of. At the risk of analogying everyone to death, it's a bit like Railtrack (change.org) and the Railway companies. (SoS). Change provide the infrastructure to allow SoS to carry out their business - but the fact remains that the passanger should know where he's going before he gets on the train.

 

I was specifically talking about a particular analogy of yours which didn't make sense though. What I wasn't doing was asking for a new one which does make sense.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Why are we arguing about this. No laws have been broken and if easdale is upset good.

[Oleg_Mcnoleg 50]

This is getting pretty inane.

[Blue Moon 1,118]

Okay, Papa Bear, I accept what you are saying.

 

I have checked Change.org's website and their method of operating is indeed to send an e mail with every signature and this is built into the system

 

Because email is so direct and effective, when you type in the email address of your recipient, Change.org's tool delivers an individual letter to your decision maker's inbox each time someone signs!

 

I did not expect a number of big boxes to be delivered to Ibrox but change.org's website explains alternative methods of online petitioning

 

Many online petition tools allow you to collect signatures online, but require you to deliver the signatures to your decision maker offline when you’re finished.

[Mountain Bear 0]

Why are we arguing about this. No laws have been broken and if easdale is upset good.

 

As clear a case of Vexatious Litigation as you are ever likely to see in my opinion.

 

Instead, Mr Easdale should focus on the mass disaffection amongst his customers, which led to 6000 of them passing on their views to him in less than 48 hours.

 

Can you imagine for one second any other businessman suing his own customers for passing on their deeply felt concerns via a petition? Pathetic.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[buster. 4,808]

I like your last analogy because in a station there tend to be big brightly lit boards telling passengers which trains leave from which platforms and where they are going and there are even announcements sometimes when there are alterations. So it must be quite difficult to get on the wrong train though I daresay it happens.

 

Changing tact slightly BH,,................ shouldn't Mr.Easdale think about addressing the concerns of thousands of Rangers supporters at a time when the PLC is thousands of ST's down on what they would have projected ?