r/Glasgow Tools

dddiamonddd

Last 12 months	Total	Deleted	Removed
Reddit URL	https://www.reddit.com/user/dddiamonddd
r/Glasgow posts	0	0	0
r/glasgow comments	560	7	0

Interests:

I feel like you're not a woman because feral neds can be just as bad. They just don't tend to be organised about it and put it on YouTube. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 2:28pm)

The publicity means women can recognise him for what he is. I didn't know this guy before now. Now I do. Now I can consciously avoid him if I ever see him about town. I can intervene if I see him trying to fire in to another woman because I know that I'm not intervening in some sort of organic interaction. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 2:39pm)

He follows these women after they try to walk away from him. Getting some random guy coming up to me giving me the kind of chat this guy is coming out with can be really quite threatening, especially if it's later on in the evening, I'm by myself, and it's quiet. But it's even worse when they've decided they definitely want to talk to you because then walking away doesn't really work. If he took the first sign of rejection as a cue to go away, he'd still be a shitehawk for doing this shit, but he sees rejection as something to be overcome, not a sign he should stop. We don't get to just walk away from guys like this. Plus, there's no shortage of situations where a woman has tried to walk away from a man and got hurt for it. My personal experience being on my way down Buchanan Street after work to meet some people in the pub, a clearly very drunk guy came up to me and started giving it the "aw where you goin hen, got a boyfriend" among other sexually explicit stuff. I walked away from him, and after shouting more explicit stuff, he shouted "HAW DONT IGNORE ME" and ran up and yanked me backwards by the hair. Luckily there were other people around who saw and dragged him away from me. Most guys aren't gonna do that, obviously, but clearly at the very least one that I have personally met was and he won't be alone given how many women I know with these kinds of stories. This is why the "just laugh at him, call him an arsehole and walk away" sort of advice doesn't really work in practice, because we don't know how this random man is going to react to being told no. So we try to politely remove ourselves instead. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 2:36pm)

Did you miss my entire point? These guys see rejection as a barrier to be overcome. They do not walk away at the first "no". I have been approached by guys who think they're a pick up artist before. They do not say "sorry" and walk away the first time they say something to you (unless they're very new to trying to be like that and struggling with it). My entire point is that **I have absolutely no idea if this guy is like the guy who pulled my hair**. I won't know if he's going to keep following me to my destination, or if he's going to hurt me, until I am actually away from him. As long as he's still *right there*, still talking at me, still trying to get a positive response, there is nothing there that tells me that this guy is not going to eventually get sick of being told no and hurt me. Elliot Rodgers, the guy who shot up a university, was one of these guys, remember. These PUA types absolutely do have the capacity to get violent. Their methodology teaches men to dehumanise women and see them as potential conquests, as vaginas to be fucked and mouths to put a dick into to increase their numbers. It isn't a huge leap for a guy who already leans on the angry/violent side who gets involved in this stuff to then view violence and anger towards the women rejecting him as okay. And I, nor you, cannot immediately tell if the person trying to talk to you is going to be violent if you try to leave. That is why the "walk away" advice is short sighted and doesn't consider the multitude of other concerns women have about these interactions. Better advice would be to move to a more public space towards other people, or go into a shop, a pub, whatever, ideally somewhere with security, to get into a generally safer scenario. If he isn't violent, he'll probably walk away at that point. If he is violent, you've changed the situation where he's less likely to be able to make a scene and get away with it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 3:07pm)

He doesn't represent everyone, never said that. But he absolutely does represent a particular type of guy that these PUAs market themselves towards. That type of guy is (hopefully) a minority, but they do real damage when PUA mantras get mixed in with their already disordered ways of thinking. How do any of these women know that this specific guy isn't going to get violent? If they don't know who he is, they won't know that he's just a sad bastard who will, according to his history, eventually fuck off when told to enough times. If he approaches me tomorrow, I'll feel far more confident in being very impolite towards him when I tell him to get the fuck away from me, but that's only because I can make a judgement call using information that wouldn't be available to me if he had approached me before I saw this video. But, that said, we don't know for sure that he'll never get violent. If this video about him gets shared widely enough that the majority of women recognise him on sight and react accordingly, maybe his attitudes towards women will get angrier. Who knows. So there's still a risk that women can't completely ignore. My whole point is about the fact that *women do not know the men approaching them, therefore they cannot accurately judge how likely he is to get violent*. We don't usually have BBC commissioned videos profiling the creep approaching us that we can refer to and establish that this guy is actually a massive shitebag who will leave us alone eventually without harming us. We have to try and mitigate the risk of getting harmed when we have no idea whether that's likely. Which leads to less "fuck off dickhead" and more polite smiling and laughing and trying to extract ourselves politely from the situation. What part of that are you struggling with? Also, do you know how difficult it can be to alert police if someone is actively in your face? How slow police can be to respond? Again, you're giving suggestions for how to act that aren't *wrong* per se, because in theory, these are the correct responses, but they are ignorant of how these interactions actually occur and what it's like to be a party to it. If I start to really feel that I'm going to get hurt based on what's happened so far, if I pull my phone out to phone the police, how do I know he won't just snatch my phone from me to stop me doing so? If I manage to alert the police, do I just stay exactly where I am and give up on trying to get away from him in order to wait for the police to arrive? by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 3:36pm)

Oh goody. Because we definitely need more of those guys! /s by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 3:43pm)

To be fair, I mostly argue with these types not to change *their* mind, but to hopefully show a different perspective to anyone who is reading silently thinking maybe this guy has a point. From what I can see on this post in general, based on what people have said, it's been mostly guys responding with well-meaning but not all that useful input. I figure it can't hurt to get the perspective of a woman in here since I could go for my daily lunchtime walk and find myself getting approached by this guy, or a guy very much like him. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 3:51pm)

As a former wee goth myself, I object to that characterisation of wee goths. Plus personally, I'd overall prefer nobody pestered me. Not sure how some wee guy with a gelled fringe that seems like he might stab me is better than a PUA like the above mentioned prick. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Jan 2019 4:38pm)

and if you reply anything other than Rangers or Celtic: *"naw wit team dae you support?"* by dddiamonddd (Wed 16th Jan 2019 3:29pm)

I've had a delivery via them. I think they usually deliver larger stuff (in my case, a spin bike). They were a bit shite, really, but not absolutely terrible. They told me that my stuff was gonna get delivered on the Tuesday and gave me a delivery slot. I waited in, got to the end of said slot, so I contacted them and they said "it's not gonna be delivered until next week" so I asked why I got a text. They never bothered to reply to that. The chat sat open for half an hour, then they ended the chat from their side. The delivery turned up about 20 minutes after that. Delivery guy had no idea that it was allegedly being delayed until the next week. by dddiamonddd (Wed 16th Jan 2019 3:34pm)

If it's on a motorway slip road, they can identify the car using that nice reg plate it has, and therefore identify the registered keeper and send them a letter. My sister got a letter because her pal chucked something out of a window without her knowing in an area covered by a camera. The letter asks you to either pay the fine, or if it wasn't you that did the actual littering, identify who was responsible. She requested proof of it and was sent screenshots of her car going down a particular road and an arm flinging something out the back window. by dddiamonddd (Fri 18th Jan 2019 9:34am)

True, but a lot of folk don't realise they don't have to identify that, nor do they not realise they aren't legally responsible for their passengers. The letter my sister got certainly didn't make her aware of that. I imagine they get a lot of people just paying up because they don't realise. by dddiamonddd (Fri 18th Jan 2019 2:20pm)

Have you checked with Newton station (or any other stations with offices along that line)? by dddiamonddd (Tue 7th May 2019 9:19am)

Are the Sikh marches "anti-Muslim" marches though? Maybe I just haven't noticed, but I've never seen anyone objecting to the Sikh march because it's promoting anti-Islam messages. I don't think I've ever been in the city when one of the Sikh marches is on-going to see it for myself though, so I could be wrong. by dddiamonddd (Tue 14th May 2019 4:35pm)

Aye didn't think that'd be the case. It's some stretch to say a Sikh march going through a Muslim area is by itself anti-Muslim. The Orange Walks going past Catholic churches wouldn't be a problem if they weren't actively anti-Catholic and acting upon it. It's like folk can't grasp this fact. by dddiamonddd (Tue 14th May 2019 5:17pm)

I'm so glad he's home. He looks like he could be my cat's brother! by dddiamonddd (Sun 19th May 2019 9:51am)

Hunners and hunners of them. I'll be showing her your post and telling her to not even consider trying any of your cat's nonsense haha. *"LOOK, you wanna make me as sad as this nice person on the internet while you're off taking part in shenanigans?! No, you don't, so no adventures, be home for dinner, I love you".* by dddiamonddd (Sun 19th May 2019 10:14am)

Where do you think they should be? if not one of the busiest streets in town? Get better headphones if you can still hear them and it irritates you that much. by dddiamonddd (Sat 13th Jul 2019 10:49am)

Are you aware that there are plenty of other routes you can take in Glasgow that completely avoid Buchanan Street? Walk elsewhere. I never said I enjoy it, I never hear it because my headphones are actually decent and mostly exclude the sound around me and I basically don't hear them at all if I have anything playing. I'm saying buy better headphones if you're actually bothered by it. Or just get over it. > my commute is being interrupted Wit? How? Are the buskers jumping out in front of you to stop you from getting where you're going? by dddiamonddd (Sat 13th Jul 2019 11:34am)

I have the MX2. And I really do not have this alleged problem. I've never heard a busker so loud that I can hear them over music at a comfortable level except that guy who pretends to play the drums surrounded by robot cats. Also, I barely ever see a crowd gather around a busker unless it's Clanadonia. Since I walk along Buchanan Street most days, I genuinely have no idea when or where this is allegedly so bad for you. by dddiamonddd (Sun 14th Jul 2019 8:15pm)

Were they meant to drag it by hand? by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 9:43am)

I like that there's folk greetin about how they've "you've released CFCs into the atmosphere with your graffiti you hypocrites!" as if CFCs haven't been banned since 1989. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 9:45am)

For once, we haven't had enough rain in the past wee while for that. Otherwise that'd have been excellent. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 9:52am)

Protests that cause disruption draw attention to the protest's subject. Not all of that attention will be favourable, of course, but they're not necessarily trying to change your thinking immediately while you crawl around the city in your car, they just want you to be aware. You might be moaning about them, but you are aware of the message it carries. The hope would be that you retain that message after the annoyance about the protest's disruption subsides and consider the message itself. You're pretty unlikely to remember anything at all about a protest that involves quietly standing out of the way of cars and pedestrians since there's nothing remarkable about that. You didn't have to acknowledge them at all, therefore, why would you remember the point of the protest except maybe to remark "oh there's some people over there with signs, I wonder what they're on about" before you drive/walk away. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 11:47am)

When the annoyance about that subsides, they'll remember what the message was though and the hope is that they'll consider it outside of the context of being stuck on a sweaty bus while running late for work. You generally don't remember protests that don't have an actual effect on your life. &#x200B; I'd like to think that being late to work because of a protest won't make people decide "fuck the planet, those wankers with a purple boat inconvenienced me so I'm going to do literally nothing to help the planet anymore". For most people, the annoyance subsides and they go back to indifference, sure, but at least some will think about it a bit more and maybe look into what the protest was about. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 11:53am)

Pretty sure that most of the car traffic along that road is not for those "struggling businesses". by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 11:57am)

I don't think they were saying they, personally, are climate refugees. The way I read it was that they're saying that there are people out there right now who are climate refugees because they're having to leave coastal towns and cities due to rising sea levels, and other places where the climate is getting more and more difficult to live in and causing droughts and famine. And that is true. It's just that these people are not as visible or acknowledged as war refugees. They're trying to argue against the idea that climate change is far off, or having no effect on anything, when objectively it is, it's just not very visible for those of us in places like the UK where the effects we've experienced haven't been that severe. It's not absolutely imminent, but if we carry on, coastal towns in the UK are going to have to be abandoned as coastal erosion speeds up due to higher than usual sea levels and tides. But by the time we're likely to find ourselves as climate refugees, it's going to be probably past the point of no return. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 12:12pm)

Would you not say that the state has a large amount of responsibility in this though? The state is in arguably the best position to fight poverty and I don't think these folks are a bunch of tories (or I hope not, I'd be really surprised if they were). The state has a lot of influence over poverty - namely that the current government is actively causing a lot of it - and the current government is also very pro-big business and pro-dodging-accountability. And since corporations are far and away the biggest problem with damaging the climate and the environment, then pressuring the state (both our government and collectively organisations like the EU, UN, etc) to take action is the only way to get them to fall in line (yet another reason why I think Brexit is dumb as hell but that's another discussion). I think the issue of climate change and poverty overlaps to such a large degree that anyone who thinks you could solve one without solving the other is naive. It seems obvious to me that you can't expect people to make better choices when they literally can't afford the better options. But I also think that avoiding climate disaster isn't gonna be dodged just by individuals making better choices. It won't have no impact, but it's not going to be enough. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 12:34pm)

If temporary disruption to your day makes you think "actually, you know what, fuck the planet because this group of people made me sit in traffic for a while", you were unlikely to be convinced by literally anything they might have done. And you're a bit of a twat. by dddiamonddd (Mon 15th Jul 2019 2:22pm)

here, I've got a VW up. I'm no threat to you! Press on your accelerator a wee tiny bit harder and I'll be a speck in your rear view in no time. by dddiamonddd (Thu 18th Jul 2019 10:38pm)

If I say "OK Google" right now, my phone will activate Google Assistant. It has to be listening to me to know when I say the trigger word. It's not a stretch to imagine that it does some level of processing on everything it hears. But what you search absolutely does influence your adverts. by dddiamonddd (Sun 21st Jul 2019 7:52pm)

I honestly don't know what else it could be aside from something like student flats, which would be a waste I think. by dddiamonddd (Mon 22nd Jul 2019 11:00pm)

I have a dashcam and I'd honestly love it if I could grass people in for dropping stuff out of their car window by sending the footage to someone. I used to have a pal who had an absolutely immaculate car, he was obsessed with keeping it clean and tidy. But he achieved that by dropping every bit of litter out of the fucking window. Better the environment around us than his BMW, apparently. I suggested he get one of those little car bins and he said that was just too wanky for him and he'd forget to empty it. But apparently being the kind of twat who drops litter out of the car is not at all "wanky". Just one of the many reasons why I don't bother with him anymore. by dddiamonddd (Fri 26th Jul 2019 4:54pm)

I lived in Dennistoun and had the metal dustbins. They were always overflowing and that was literally the only place we ever saw rats. They loved that bit. by dddiamonddd (Wed 31st Jul 2019 10:04am)

I remember reading somewhere that that liquid cheese stuff isn't technically cheese, it's a "cheese product". Same idea as how those wee boxes of juice you get for kids are called "fruit juice drinks" because they're not actually fruit juice, or at least not enough fruit juice to be called "fruit juice". by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 10:22am)

You can serve burgers rare. The problematic stuff on beef is on the outside of the meat which is why you can have steak rare and be fine. It's not like chicken where the problem stuff is throughout the meat (though even then, that's not always the case - chicken sashimi is a thing). If you get the beef yourself, and you carve it yourself, you can remove the contaminated outside leaving just the inner meat and mince that and serve it raw/rare. If you just got some beef and minced it as is, you're spreading the outer layer throughout and that means the burger needs to be cooked all the way through. Chances that the creator of this did that and did it properly? Probably not that likely. But you can totally eat it rare with no issues if you could also eat a steak rare. by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 10:26am)

Mate, I don't think you actually read my entire comment. It's like you read the first sentence and got so excited to prove someone wrong on the internet that you turned off your brain. by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 11:12am)

Fun fact: Chicken Pot Noodles are suitable for vegetarians (though not vegans, but only because of milk and egg). by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 12:17pm)

In the context of everything else I was saying, I feel like it's pretty obvious I was meaning it can be eaten rare IF prepared the way I said it needs to be prepared (that your source literally mentioned). by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 12:15pm)

Cooking anything never completely removes the risk of everything since something can look fully cooked without being so. A steak can appear cooked on the outside but there could still be bacteria lurking in a wee crevice that didn't make contact with the pan and didn't get up to the right temperature. It's about taking it on balance and likelihood of a problem. What I meant with "you can eat it rare if you could also eat a steak rare" is that the rareness is not necessarily gonna be the issue. The issue would be the preparation. Some people can't eat steak rare because of digestion issues or whatever. If you can successfully eat and digest a rare steak without encountering any problems, you're not going to have any particular problems eating and digesting a rare burger ASSUMING that it has been prepared properly. If it has been prepared improperly, then yeah, you're possibly gonna have issues that'll be down to the preparation, not the rareness by itself. Which is why I explained the way that it can be prepared properly. This isn't "health advice" it's more like cooking advice if anything. by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 12:28pm)

>that it's riskless, because that's not true. Never said it was riskless, mate. The fact that it's a pure mission to prepare it in a way that minimises risk would, to anyone who knows anything about the risks with red meat, imply that it's difficult to prepare in the ideal way that can remove the problematic area (the surface) with no cross contamination. Don't think an auld granny is coming to /r/glasgow for advice on how to mince her own burgers though. And if she goes to a restaurant and she orders a rare burger, eats it, and gets ill, that means the place that served her fucked up. Nothing to do with me. by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 12:33pm)

Again, the context of "here's how it can be prepared properly" and an explanation of why burgers are considered risky should have given away that you can't just eat any old rare burger and expect to be fine since it's so dependent on the preparation method. I feel like anybody with basic reading comprehension ability would be able to connect the "it's fine" with the explanation of the task of rendering it fine and recognise that since they do not know how it may have been prepared when they're served a burger by a third-party, they shouldn't assume it's definitely safe. I also said, in my comment: > If **you** get the beef **yourself**, and **you** carve it **yourself, you** can remove the contaminated outside leaving just the inner meat and mince that and serve it raw/rare. Which I feel like also makes it clear that if you have total control over the preparation process (aside from physically butchering the cow), you can make your own burger and serve it rare. I literally never said that it's riskless, only that it's possible to do relatively safely and how. >You can't give cooking advice that doesn't affect health can you? uh aye you can. Unless you're gonna start getting into proper molecular gastronomy/woo-woo homeopath stuff about how advising someone to use more turmeric is "health advice" because turmeric allegedly has health benefits when used in food? I guess I'll just make sure to never talk about cooking on /r/glasgow since apparently cooking advice = health advice in your eyes? Either way, I've edited my original comment to clear up the apparent confusion about what I'm actually saying. by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 12:49pm)

I dunno about the ownership but I used to get them from a newsagent near my school and I definitely remember them being way better. That would have been like 12-13 years ago now. Had one recently and it was pretty shite but I don't know how much of that is from the fact that I'm not 13 anymore. Aye those ones in Tesco are great. There's good ones from Costco as well. by dddiamonddd (Fri 23rd Aug 2019 8:11pm)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-49831865 This absolute roaster. by dddiamonddd (Mon 7th Oct 2019 11:40pm)

I'd love residential parking permits for my area. I live right beside a train station (which does have its own car park), but loads of people park on the streets around the station (even when there's spaces in the car park), and they, in particular, love this little paved bit that's not technically a car park but gets used as one. I park there to save me from having to constantly wash my car. But it means that if I leave the house in the car at any point during the day, there's a near-100% chance that I'll come back to find a car belonging to someone that definitely doesn't live here parked in "my" space (it's not actually mine, I just always park there - the folk who live here all park in the same spots virtually all the time) and I need to go park somewhere stupid (or in a residential street that is not my own, thereby inconveniencing someone else that lives here) until around 6-7pm which is when all the commuters come back. by dddiamonddd (Thu 7th Nov 2019 11:19am)

The best bit is that they literally cause the traffic they're trying to skip. Because it virtually always clears up right after that. by dddiamonddd (Thu 28th Nov 2019 9:57pm)

That's probably not true unfortunately. The driver behind is supposed to be paying attention to the road and what the cars in front are doing. If they don't react in time, they either weren't paying attention or they were too close. So it's the person behind that's more likely to end up with getting done for driving without due care and attention. As much as I think pricks like this guy *should* be getting done for driving the way they describe, there's not inherently something illegal about it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 28th Nov 2019 10:02pm)

The address that my ballot had certainly didn't have an East Ren address. Can't mind exactly where it said now and I've already posted it, but I definitely commented on it when I saw it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 5th Dec 2019 8:36pm)

Copied from the FB post: > So for those that think we are overpaid for what we do. Don't get me wrong a lot of time is spend doing nothing, but things can change quickly and drastically. This was tonight on sauchiehall street. Gun pulled on door staff. Fully loaded. Luckily he was taken down before he got a chance to use it. In the scale of thing we don't get paid enough for what we do generally (luckily my work is above average). Glasgow door staff pay is some of the lowest in the UK. This is due to agencies a long time ago running the wage down and it's never truly recovered. It doesn't help that some of those in the industry are willing to work for peanuts. ( know sometimes needs must.) Just remember we do put our lives on the line whether you believe it or not. by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Dec 2019 12:40am)

People definitely do - I am one of them, though I absolutely resent the price so I haven't bought anything from them for myself in years. by dddiamonddd (Mon 23rd Dec 2019 10:01pm)

Some home insurance policies do extend to stuff that you take out of the house, including bikes and such. But it'll depend on the specific wording. by dddiamonddd (Tue 31st Dec 2019 12:45am)

PureGym at Silverburn isn't the most impressive. It has like two squat racks, though it did have a hex bar when I was last there which was nice. Hope Street is better. But having used both The Gym and Pure Gym, they are much of a muchness. by dddiamonddd (Sun 5th Jan 2020 1:07pm)

Fun fact: the unicorn is literally the national animal of Scotland. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Jan 2020 10:23am)

try making your jokes funny next time and folk might actually laugh. as it stands, relying on "haha that's so gay" as a joke is juvenile as fuck and only absolute dipshits find it funny anymore. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Jan 2020 1:57pm)

> After 6pm Mon-Fri (Free Weekends) you can park to the east of the M8 I'm 99% sure it's not free weekends anymore and hasn't been for ages? by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Jan 2020 2:19pm)

It's not £4.50 a day - it's a fiver and has been for at least a year, unless there's something other than the POD card that I'm not aware of? by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Jan 2020 2:18pm)

ohh, didn't know about that. That said, for the sake of 50p, I'll avoid the risk of a confrontation haha. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Jan 2020 3:05pm)

It's not free Sunday parking in town anymore either. It's 6pm through to 8am every day now. :( by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Jan 2020 10:38pm)

I don't think there needs to be any more rules than there already are. I find they tend to leave me alone pretty quickly - I've apparently got a serious resting bitch face, as well as looking young (the few times I have stopped for them, they've actually asked me if I'm over 18, I'm nearly 26...), and big headphones. I just don't look at them at all. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Jan 2020 4:49pm)

I've always found it annoying. Someone tried to tell me he wasn't a prick because "aw he's doing it in memory of his dead son". Aye, very good, he's still money-grabbing. He's still just sitting pretending to play some bins with some toy cats (or not, apparently, as the case may be now). Not how I'd want to be remembered tbh. by dddiamonddd (Sat 8th Feb 2020 4:46pm)

I like the guy who just stands on top of a box wearing plastic armour (or dressed as a ninja, I've been assuming it's the same guy doing both), not even doing the thing where he stands perfectly still, and somehow expects people to just put money in his tub. by dddiamonddd (Sun 9th Feb 2020 1:28pm)

Dogs aren't likely to take a permanent marker or a crayon to the wall or furniture. by dddiamonddd (Mon 10th Feb 2020 2:57pm)

My employer's default email font is that - it's a big 4 accounting firm. But that's not what emails or letters from Tennents look like. by dddiamonddd (Mon 10th Feb 2020 6:47pm)

If you can get a Costco membership (or know someone who has it) the cat litter they sell in Costco is much better value and quality than most of the stuff I've gotten from supermarkets. same goes for cat biscuits if you feed your cat any biscuits. and nobody judges bulk buying in there because everything's in bulk. by dddiamonddd (Mon 9th Mar 2020 3:06pm)

Apparently they were cleaned out of their toilet roll yesterday. Queues from 10am and everything. by dddiamonddd (Mon 9th Mar 2020 11:07pm)

I've been able to tell that everything's different because I can park outside of my own flat during the day for once, because there's significantly less people using the train station across the road to go into Glasgow. I went out for a bit in the middle of the day and came back to find my space still there. That's never happened before. by dddiamonddd (Wed 18th Mar 2020 10:47pm)

From Dettol's website: https://www.dettol.co.uk/about-us/understanding-coronavirus/ > Specific Dettol products have demonstrated effectiveness (>99.9% inactivation) against coronavirus strains from the same family as the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) in third party laboratory testing, when used in accordance with the directions for use. These products are: Dettol Antibacterial Surface Cleanser Spray, Dettol Antibacterial Surface Cleanser Wipes, Dettol All-In-One Disinfectant Spray, and Dettol Disinfectant Liquid. > Given the structural similarities of the COVID-19 virus to the coronavirus strains tested previously (SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, Human Coronavirus), and based on the evidence available to us, we would expect our Dettol products (listed above) to be effective against the new strain. Definitive scientific confirmation of this, as with all other commercially available virucides, can only be provided once testing against COVID-19 Coronavirus has been conducted, following release of the strain by relevant health authorities. So naw, an antibacterial wipe will not necessarily "just move it about". by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Mar 2020 7:55pm)

Cineworld probably won't be around after this anyway. They were already in a shite financial position. by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Mar 2020 8:02pm)

> Couples holding hands in supermarkets If a couple lives together, there's no requirement for them to socially distance themselves from each other when they're out in public. What's the point in me staying away from my boyfriend in public and not holding hands, just to go home and sleep in the same bed? by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Mar 2020 8:01pm)

Are you just being willfully fucking stupid? Did you no read what I copied & pasted from Dettol's own website? Because it literally says they haven't been able to test it. They *expect* that it should work because it worked on all the other coronaviruses that we know about, including SARS. Better that someone uses Dettol on the *likely* chance that it works than not use it at all, you dipshit. Also: > Coronavirus is a large category of viruses that includes the common cold The common cold is more commonly a rhinovirus, not a coronavirus. Only around 15% of cases are caused by a coronavirus and Dettol works against that. by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Mar 2020 8:08pm)

Is anybody actually trusting the wipe alone? Naw, they're still washing their hands afterwards and using hand sanitiser. Don't be such a fucking idiot. by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Mar 2020 8:12pm)

And you think your shitey post on reddit is gonna do anything to change their minds, when the government and the NHS is telling them to wrap it and they don't listen to that? You're just getting on at people for no reason because apparently you've hopped up on your high horse. You're having a go at someone using Dettol which does kill viruses, not one of the baby wipe idiots. Go find one of them and have a go at them. by dddiamonddd (Sun 22nd Mar 2020 8:16pm)

and when that goon arrives, I'm gonna open the door and tell him I've got a cough and a fever if he tries to bully his way in. by dddiamonddd (Fri 27th Mar 2020 3:49pm)

Doesn't mean they won't try to force their way in. When I first moved to my current flat and lived alone, two big 6ft+ guys arrived at my door from the TV licensing and I told them I wasn't letting them in because I'm a woman who lives alone and I'm not comfortable with that, plus I don't need one. Didn't stop them trying to take a step past me saying "aye but it'll only take 5 minutes". I started shutting the door on them and they sort of pushed back on it, but my neighbour across the landing opened their door and they left. by dddiamonddd (Fri 27th Mar 2020 7:57pm)

Still your mum though and you're still only 15. Help your mum. by dddiamonddd (Tue 31st Mar 2020 5:48pm)

Perhaps they'll have a security checkpoint of sorts at the train station end so they can allow NHS staff through? Hope so. Otherwise that'd be annoying as hell for any NHS staff. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Apr 2020 2:30pm)

Some wankers have gone and put shite graffiti over the "People Make Glasgow" art alongside Central Station's train lines which was "legal" graffiti, in that it was done a graffiti style at the request of either Scotrail or GCC or whoever, but either way, it was there with permission. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Apr 2020 11:07pm)

Now that, I couldn't reliably tell you. I've never been involved in the community though did move about in the periphery of it years ago. From what I gathered at the time, when it was artistic in nature (and not just someone who wrote FLEETO or FUCK THE POLIS somewhere), then you wouldn't touch it ever. I don't know if that was the case across the community as a whole, or if it was just the folk I knew, and I have no idea if there was an expiry on that respect. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Apr 2020 12:01am)

you obviously weren't in Silverburn Tesco because I'm starting to lose my mind at it haha. Lots of folk got a grumpy look from me. It's just bugging me because you'd think that surely, by accident, some folk would end up following them, y'know, 50% chance and all. But naw, somehow like 70% of people were doing it wrong. Ultimately, now you know and you'll do it next time. It seems a lot of people know, but don't care. Saw someone look at the arrow, look down the aisle past me, and be like "ooh it's just for one thing" and she went halfway down the aisle. It's infuriating. by dddiamonddd (Sun 19th Apr 2020 6:27pm)

>There's nothing wrong with it IF distance is maintained. the whole fucking point though, is that the more people there are outside, the harder it becomes to maintain safe distance. hence why you've been told to stay the fuck inside, and when you are out, to only be out for a specific, good reason, and to keep moving when you are out. by dddiamonddd (Sun 19th Apr 2020 6:34pm)

The red place behind her is the Shelter boutique on Byres Road. by dddiamonddd (Thu 23rd Apr 2020 4:54pm)

Is it really a "rare nice day" now when we've had a lot of them recently? The "rare nice day" argument for people going outside doesn't really cut it when it's been lovely for a while now. by dddiamonddd (Sun 31st May 2020 10:58am)

Dunno, didn't count. As for this year - you've been allowed out in your garden or out for a walk/exercise for the entirety of the lockdown. If you didn't take advantage of that to be able to spend some time outside, that's on you. by dddiamonddd (Sun 31st May 2020 1:15pm)

I have an American pal that I explained the true meaning of "what team do you support?" in the west of Scotland to and he thought I was bamming him up. It sounds so fucking stupid when you explain it to someone who has zero idea about the Old Firm being a proxy for sectarianism. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Jun 2020 2:03pm)

>I don't really understand why some people would like to see a second wave. Because it's an easy way to deligitimise the point of whomever you can point to as the cause. Whether they *literally* want a second wave, I think probably not. But it'd make saying that BLM (or whatever) is stupid easier because they can say "BLM protests are stupid because it caused a second wave". Their real reasons for thinking it's stupid can be draped with public health concerns. Lots of people are already primed to think protests right now are stupid because "it might cause a second wave", so an actual second wave happening would turn lots of those people completely against whatever the cause is. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Jun 2020 2:40pm)

I don't know if you didn't grow up in the west of Scotland or what, but in my experience , "what team do you support?" for the purpose of chatting football and "*what team do you support?*" are two different questions and it's usually very obvious which one you're being asked. by dddiamonddd (Sun 21st Jun 2020 8:25am)

Emphasising that it hurts wee animals was a big part of what turned me away from littering when I little tbh. It's depressing, but it works, especially if you can relate it to animals the kids like. by dddiamonddd (Mon 22nd Jun 2020 8:51pm)

Rubbing it all over our own face isn't the issue. If you've got coronavirus, you can't re-catch it from yourself so you can rub your own output all over yourself all you like. It's the fact that people are touching the mask to re-adjust or take it off, then touching other stuff. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 10:29am)

It does exist, kind of. There was a text sent out to everyone on 24th of March that was saying the lockdown was now in force. But the difference was that it wasn't a centralised system - the text in March was done by the networks at the request of the government, whereas the system you were thinking of would have been the government directly sending the texts out themselves. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 10:27am)

Yeah I've got autism and I find masks to be a bit of a sensory nightmare, but I also think I'd feel much worse if I found out I was cutting about with coronavirus and passing it on to folk without knowing. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 10:34am)

I went into the post office with a hat, sunglasses, and a mask on and it was only as I got to the front of the queue that I thought about how fucking suspicious I must have looked, but the wee lady at the counter didn't look even a little bit bothered. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 10:32am)

The guidance hasn't changed, it's still 2m inside shops, but that there can be exceptions made provided there's sufficient mitigation in place. [https://www.gov.scot/news/moving-to-phase-3-of-lockdown-route-map/](https://www.gov.scot/news/moving-to-phase-3-of-lockdown-route-map/) by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 10:31am)

Yeah I've said the 24th of March, which is when I got it, but I think the lockdown started a few days before so maybe mine was also late! by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 10:52am)

What data? by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jul 2020 2:59pm)

I work as an auditor and most of my clients are towards Edinburgh, or even further afield. As much as WFH is technically working, there's a load of weaknesses in it that I'm kinda anxious to get back to working out at client sites. A client can very easily ignore me when I'm sending an email, and they can just reject my phone calls. But it's much harder to ignore me when I'm standing right by their desk telling them to give me something I need or asking them a question. It's why I really want an electric car, to minimise the impact of that driving (I already drive a car with low emissions and 55+ mpg to try and minimise the petrol usage - short slip roads onto a 70mph road can be a nightmare but I make do). I was already working from home sometimes. Probably the biggest struggle for me is the lack of distinction between work & home now. I'm sitting at the desk that I use for leisure time too, so getting up at the weekend and sitting down at my desk causes me to immediately feel like I'm at work. Also, sometimes I just have a quick question for my senior (or my juniors have a question for me) and it feels like such a big deal to phone them, vs in the audit room where they would just ask across the desk if I had two minutes. It was always obvious if someone was busy, on a phone call, etc because you can see them. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Jul 2020 12:27pm)

I quite liked my commute. I would listen to audiobooks or podcasts, and it just feels a bit weird to sit for an hour in the morning listening to an audiobook. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Jul 2020 12:36pm)

Right now in particular - the dumps are shut or on limited hours. There's been an uptick in flytipping where I am because there's a rotation system on who can get into the dump and when, and the hours are limited. So folk can't dump their stuff there because the hours are so limited - they're only open in the middle of a typical work day, so if you have basically any kind of job, you're doing a lunch break jaunt and risking being in a half an hour queue. Not open on the weekends either. Can't go to dumps in the surrounding council areas because they're asking for proof of residency, so you might get there and get turned away. I don't think it's ultimately justifiable, because I just kept all the shite in my car until I could get to the dump, it's really not a big deal, but I can see why people get tempted to just pull up to a verge and dump it all out. by dddiamonddd (Thu 16th Jul 2020 10:53am)

I've done that journey a fair amount. You should be alright. by dddiamonddd (Mon 10th Aug 2020 8:59pm)

Nah mate. They will ask why. You cannot just "cancel" the payment, even if it's pending, and especially not if it's cleared. It is, by definition, not a fraudulent payment because OP provided their card details to this garage, presumably expecting to maybe make a payment. When you provide your card information and a payment is taken but you don't get what you expected (or you're charged too much, or whatever), it's not fraud from the perspective of the bank, it's either a scam or a contractual dispute depending on the circumstances. The problem is that they took a payment that OP believes (by the sounds of it, correctly) was outside of what was agreed. That isn't fraud. This is a contractual dispute, and OP could certainly dispute the payment with their bank, but literally the first question they'll be asked is about whether or not they have gone through whatever channels they can to resolve it directly with the company in question first. If he hasn't made a reasonable attempt to resolve it with the company, he's extremely likely to be told no and told to go do that first. Because part of a dispute process involves submitting evidence of attempts made to resolve the problem, so he's gonna have to at least try to resolve it with the company first regardless. Source: worked for a bank for 6 years, with several years of that being in the department OP would be calling to start a dispute. /u/mushroomfandango do what you can to try and get them to refund you, but if you don't get a response within a reasonable amount of time (say a week), or you're unhappy with the response, phone your bank and say you want to dispute the charge because the business has charged you for something that you didn't agree to before you put your car in with them. by dddiamonddd (Wed 12th Aug 2020 9:05pm)

What are visually impaired people going to use to know when it's safe for them to cross then, eh? by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Dec 2020 8:28pm)

They don't do nothing. For a start, it's not a huge amount of extra outlay. They serve a function, even if it's just a psychological one for most of us. Plus, there's the spinner underneath for blind people. They absolutely serve a function. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Dec 2020 8:25pm)

and people will have been found guilty of human trafficking in other parts of Glasgow and Scotland too. Doesn't make this a problem unique to Govanhill, does it? And, the fact that there has been people found guilty, doesn't that prove that something is actually being done? As opposed to the greetin faces claiming "nothing" is being done? You can't get a conviction through doing fuck all. by dddiamonddd (Fri 18th Dec 2020 7:38pm)

well, according to all the geniuses in the Facebook comments, he "invited" the police to contact him and they haven't. As if it's his role to "invite" the police to do anything. But then other geniuses claim that evidence has indeed been handed over to the police and they've done nothing. Source: "trust me". by dddiamonddd (Fri 18th Dec 2020 7:42pm)

What a compelling argument. by dddiamonddd (Fri 18th Dec 2020 7:54pm)

The key difference here is that you're not (I assume) currently making rambling Facebook videos (or replying to those rambling videos) about how you know all about the drug dealing and who's doing the dealing and where and when but refusing to actually pass on all this information to people who are *actually* capable of doing anything about it. by dddiamonddd (Fri 18th Dec 2020 7:49pm)

/r/AITA tends to have less uses of the word "cunt" as the Americans there don't like it. by dddiamonddd (Sun 27th Dec 2020 7:57pm)

This isn't a gentle ribbing, taking the piss a wee bit, this is mocking someone for taking precautions to avoid getting themselves and the people around them ill. It's cunty behaviour of the highest order. by dddiamonddd (Sun 27th Dec 2020 7:55pm)

Teslas put the brake lights on any time you're not on the accelerator because it uses regenerative braking, even if you're not touching the brakes. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Feb 2021 10:39am)

>accountancy grad schemes (after interning in the summer) I'm in one of the accounting firms these types end up in (I got here via an apprenticeship) and fuck me, they're arseholes. There was one guy who was interning who got incredibly snobby about how someone (WHO WAS IN CHARGE OF HIM) went to GCU. The fucking cheek of them to walk into an internship, trying to impress the firm enough to be kept on, and immediately start being an arse to your seniors about where they went to uni, as if that senior didn't get the exact same job and then get promoted because they're clearly competent. When we got asked for our opinions of the interns, a few of us said that guy wasn't a good fit for the firm and he didn't come back, thank fuck. by dddiamonddd (Thu 18th Feb 2021 7:00pm)

Glasgow Uni gets about 30% of its tuition fee income from Chinese students alone. They don't make as much money off of 'home' students as you think they do (I should know - I work on the financial statement audit for a couple of them). by dddiamonddd (Thu 18th Feb 2021 7:05pm)

You don't even need to ask them. Just look up their financial statements online and senior management salaries are in there. by dddiamonddd (Tue 23rd Feb 2021 5:37pm)

It isn't young teams that drive litter though. It's normal, otherwise perfectly nice people who just don't care and drop their rubbish. It isn't solely young teams that leave masses of rubbish behind them in parks when the weather is good, for example. by dddiamonddd (Tue 23rd Feb 2021 5:34pm)

It's not really innocuous though, is it? It's just a dickhead being a dickhead. Why do you think the "Glasgow you know" is one that's full of total cunts? by dddiamonddd (Fri 26th Feb 2021 1:37pm)

Most phones now auto-back up your photos to the cloud unless you specifically turn it off, and it's not unthinkable that some less techy people wouldn't realise. My mum didn't know it was being done on her phone until her phone broke and I asked her about it & we were able to recover all the photos she thought she'd lost from her iCloud. by dddiamonddd (Mon 1st Mar 2021 9:20pm)

No, just thousands of pictures of our pets that had died over the years. by dddiamonddd (Tue 2nd Mar 2021 8:36am)

My sister just bought a house and, in terms of floorspace, she's got less space than I do in a one bedroom tenement that has a box room. by dddiamonddd (Thu 4th Mar 2021 1:37pm)

Thing is, there's no way these folk did this and then all went home to their separate houses. They're back at each other's houses for a bevvy. BLM protesters weren't, and BLM protesters were (for the most part) trying to keep their distance from one another and a significant portion were wearing masks. It feels like there's a difference between a crowd like this that's essentially partying, and people standing in a park together. by dddiamonddd (Sun 7th Mar 2021 9:44pm)

It's not a shocking revelation, it's just one that proves the absurdity of insisting on having privatised railways when the contract gets awarded to, essentially, the Dutch government who use it to make their nationalised railways more affordable for Dutch people. It proves that we should really be nationalising our railways too. Especially since ScotRail is hardly raking in cash for Abellio and Dutch trains don't appear to be getting vastly more expensive in response, because the Dutch government clearly feels that it is better to keep public transport affordable for their residents than to try and make it break-even or profit-making. That's not "hating capitalism" (as someone alleged in reply to you, though I do have some choice thoughts about that too) or being ignorant (I am literally an accountant, through my work I help to push capitalism along whether I like it or not), that's recognising that capitalism has some glaring flaws that only become more intensely obvious when you apply them to a system like a railway that can only really, effectively, have a single provider. Capitalism is meant to be all about competition, and there cannot be competition on railways. I gain absolutely nothing if I can choose from 3 providers at my train station, because I am a captive market. I need to get the train regardless of the price because I need to get to work, and which train I choose will be largely chosen based on whether it gets me where I need to be on time. I don't have free choice of provider, so it may as well be a monopoly that's won by whichever provider manages to get their train in the timeslot that's the peak of peak-time travel. There's no room for competition. Shit, I have it on good authority that ScotRail are absolutely dying to cut my line off completely because it's not profitable for them. But given that most trains are more like a public service than they are a capitalistic venture, if they cut off my line, they cut off a lot of people's access to their jobs and leisure time, so they can't do so without experiencing a huge backlash. And I don't think they should be able to either. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Mar 2021 9:52am)

I don't think you'll find a single letting agency that there's no horror stories about. I've been with Countrywide for two flats (including my current one) and they've been good, but they're only particularly good this time because they leave me completely alone and I have a decent landlord, with everything going through the landlord instead of the agency - they just collect the money. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Mar 2021 9:57am)

> The competition in the current railway structure is in the tender process, not on the customer end. I wouldn't say that's a red herring. I know it's at the tender end, I've seen it first-hand, and my point is that the process is nowhere near as competitive as it should be. The fact that nationalisation isn't a potential option for the government means that *someone* has to get the contract at the end of the tender process and it'll always be someone seeking to make profit out of it. There's no real incentive to provide a great service to the end users - whoever is tendering for it only needs to be slightly more competitive than whoever else is tendering in terms of costs or bold promises, and that doesn't necessarily translate to a better service for the end users (which it, so far, hasn't done). I'm not a great fan of capitalism in general, but the competition does mean that there is pressure on enterprises to offer a great service to customers in order to win customers from competitors. By no means does that consistently lead to a great experience for customers, but it's pressure to do so nonetheless. But that pressure cannot exist with trains. And there's no real pressure at the tendering side for them to do so either. With no pressure to do better, why bother being better? Even when they are so shite that the government steps in, they know the government won't be cutting them off immediately, they still get a good few years to squeeze us, and the contract is just going to be offered up to some other profit-making organisation. So I am 100% all for adding in a government-backed arms-length organisation to the tendering process, and *if* a profit-seeking organisation does get the contract, they're going to have to work much harder to justify why they should be allowed to squeeze profits from a public service. But I think I'd prefer if we just went directly for nationalising them completely and shutting for-profit companies out of the core of the railways. I'm fine for Virgin or whoever to keep running long-distance trains, but my ability to get in to the city shouldn't be reliant on a company that resents the existence of my train station continuing to grit their teeth and operate the line anyway. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Mar 2021 11:04am)

Part 2 of 2: > If that happens, the money can then be used on healthcare, education etc. So how much money is currently going to those things that wouldn't be going to them under a nationalised system? Also, since you've mentioned "oh my, the start-up costs!", you do realise that it would not be as expensive to set up as you think it would be? ScotRail doesn't fire all its staff when the contract changes over - the employees just get transferred to a new company. The train stock are all attached to the operation contract, they're not "owned" by Abellio, they're owned by the entity that is ScotRail, they just rebrand them. The railways and major stations like Central aren't owned by ScotRail so they're not really relevant. In the transfer from a private company to a publicly owned one, the immediate costs are really not that scary. There wouldn't be *no* costs, of course, but the tender is generally the priciest part of the contract transfer. It wouldn't be cheap, but it wouldn't be hugely expensive either. > Surely that would supercede any ideological concerns over profiteering, wouldn't you agree? In summary, no, I don't agree, because you're being short-sighted as fuck. Because my desire for nationalisation is not based solely on concerns about profiteering (and you were really sailing past my point if you thought it was). by dddiamonddd (Thu 11th Mar 2021 10:45am)

Just need to be careful with this, because if you make the wrong call and your band ends up going up, then they'll possibly bump up the bands of everyone around you if they're in similar properties. So just be cautious with doing it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 11th Mar 2021 10:59am)

The fact that they seem to be doing something about the allegation now, after he's (allegedly - which I am saying because he obviously hasn't been convicted yet, not because I don't think he didn't do it) murdered someone, suggests it's more likely to be that they didn't bother to fully investigate it, than there being little evidence. They don't need much in the way of evidence to charge someone - the level of evidence matters for prosecution and it's not up to the police to decide if the evidence available reaches the level that'd be required to convince a judge or jury beyond reasonable doubt that a crime took place. But that doesn't mean that police don't sometimes make that call anyway. by dddiamonddd (Sun 14th Mar 2021 12:06pm)

"I'd usually get a rescue but this time I just really wanted an allegedly purebred pug from the back of a fucking van because I find the way they choke on their own breath so cute!" by dddiamonddd (Tue 16th Mar 2021 2:27pm)

Yeah I saw a lovely litter of kittens go up on a cat rescue Facebook page, considered putting my name in the very full hat, then read in the wee bio of each kitten, which was no more than 6 weeks old at the time, "when I am older, I would prefer to go exploring outside" - fucking what? It's 6 weeks old, it's never been outside! How can you know this wee thing prefers something it's never done?! All of my cats before this (they all live with my mum because I had to move and couldn't find somewhere that would let me have them which is ANOTHER thing that pisses me off) have been inside cats since they were born and they were all perfectly happy. My oldest cats would need to be literally thrown outside because they are just not interested. by dddiamonddd (Tue 16th Mar 2021 2:31pm)

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAS. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 4:02pm)

No, it really doesn't. I don't mind paying the current prices to get into the city centre at peak times. I resent it right now because I pay £6 to get onto an overcrowded train that runs late (if it turns up at all, or if it doesn't just fucking barrel full-speed past my station because they only put on two carriages and it was full two stops before mine), on a line that I have it on good authority that ScotRail have been D Y I N G to get rid of because it's not as profitable as most other lines, and often find myself delayed in getting home because of the train back running late (or, again, not at all) or they've put two carriages on for the half 5 train meaning that you're pressed up against everyone else, if you get onto that train at all. If I pay the same but get a better service because the higher ups aren't trying to wring a profit out of my journey, I'll be plenty happy. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 4:20pm)

Does it really need to be 80% cheaper for it to be worth it though? Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't turn down paying £1.20 to get to the city centre at peak times, but it won't cost them nothing to run things. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 4:43pm)

Oystercards are smart cards that you can load with credit and tap in and out of various public transport options (including the underground, buses, railways, etc) in London. Rather than being charged £X for the underground, then another £Y for the bus, and so on, you tap in and out and at the end of the day, it adds it all up and charges you, subject to a cap, and there's also a weekly cap. But you don't even need an Oystercard - you can do it with a contactless card or pay with your phone. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 4:41pm)

if you don't mind, I'm not gonna specify because if I do, I might as well post my home address and doxx myself given what I've said previously about where I am relative to my local train station. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 4:46pm)

Yeah I honestly cannot fathom getting a cat just to chuck it back outside to eat all the nice wee birds that visit my garden. I'd set up a cat tree at a window for them to look at them and dream of murdering them (so called "Cat TV" in my mum's house), but am I fuck letting them out. I like my cats, I want them to be in my house with me so we can hang out and play, rather than them wandering off into other people's gardens, dodging traffic, and only coming home to eat. Plus, when you consider the statistics that say that indoor cats live something like 3 times as long on average as outdoor cats? No question, hands down, they live inside the house and at most they'll get a catio in terms of getting outside unattended. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 4:53pm)

It's cool! I understand the curiousity. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 8:06pm)

The cancellation of the current contract happened a while ago (it should have run longer but there was a break clause the govt could use to end it early if performance was poor and, surprise! Performance was poor) and the intention at that point was to put it out to tender as usual. Then the pandemic happened and they temporarily nationalised it just to keep it from failing. And now they're not putting it out to tender. I think it'd be a lot of work to set up an actual public sector body for a temporary takeover, so I'd be surprised if it went back to being privatised any time soon (if at all). by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Mar 2021 8:15pm)

The curfew is a deliberately absurd idea. I'm told I shouldn't go outside at night because I might get attacked, and men don't bat a fucking eye at that. But when someone says "how about we tell men not to go outside at night instead?", you all freak the fuck out. If it's absurd to suggest that you stay inside, then direct some of the anger you feel about the absurdity of it at the people who tell women the same thing. Which is what is happening every time a woman is attacked at night and people roll out questions like "why was she out on her own after dark?" "why was she walking alone?". This is a de facto curfew on women. By choosing to do things like exist outside at night, we're being told that any attack we experience is effectively our own fault, because we should know better than to dare to go outside at night. Where is your anger about that? by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 12:09am)

What were the circumstances of those deaths? How many of those 45 men were randomly attacked while they were walking home, minding their own business? How many of them were sexually assaulted at the same time? How many of them were killed by romantic partners (current or ex)? Like it or not, the type of circumstances surrounding the murder of men and the murder of women are different in the majority of cases. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 12:06am)

Rangers have, apparently, won 55 titles or something as of like last week or something. But arguably it's only 1 (?) because the Rangers that won the first 54 doesn't exist anymore since they went into administration a while ago and I'm sure I'm about to get ripped on by Rangers fans, to whom I say: fuck off, I literally do not give a shit about football. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 12:17am)

Hah it's fine! Looks like one of them saw your comment and was upset that you didn't know about their beloved football team. Whatever it was they won that made them all compulsively start saying "55" constantly is also what wrecked the memorial benches in George Square like 2 weeks ago. So they're not in high regard in this sub at the moment. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 12:23am)

Mate I'm an accountant. I'm willing to bet money that I understand what happened to Rangers the legal entity better than you, no need for a half arsed shite explanation of it. I was quite clearly not getting into the weeds of it because who gives a shit? It wasn't Celtic that gave me the idea that it was only 1 title. Anyway, fuuuuuck off. I don't give a shit about football. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 10:00am)

I don't give a shit about football. I answered someone's honest question about what was going on with the 55 shite. Dunno how this is "derailment". Especially since I think you're directing your ire at the wrong person since, if you look at my post history, you'll see I'm getting into the same arguments you are with folk. Pick your fucking battles. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 11:36am)

Circumstances are very relevant. Circumstances are what turn that statistic into a relevant risk assessment for you. If, for just a made up number here, half of those murders of men are associated with gang activity - gang members murdering members of other gangs - if you are not in a gang, it's incredibly unlikely that you'll ever be a victim of that type of murder, which immediately means your personal chances of being murdered isn't "twice that of women". If those homicides are concentrated in the central belt and you're in the Highlands, how is that statistic relevant to you and your personal chance of being murdered? by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 12:44pm)

Not a Mr and nobody asked for an explanation. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 1:29pm)

They didn't ask for an explanation of what I meant by the 1 v 55 thing and you replied to me, not them. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 2:43pm)

Top notch reading comprehension because I said they apparently had won 55 titles, not that "apparently" they went into administration. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Mar 2021 8:45pm)

Says the guy that can't just admit he read a comment wrong? Now you're having to roll out tired misogyny? by dddiamonddd (Sun 21st Mar 2021 12:08am)

My building was bad for this. Until one day we came back to find a junkie trying to break into one of the downstairs flats. It's all fine and well leaving it open until it's suddenly not fine. Currently trying to teach someone new to the building to lock the door without outright telling them, but I think I'm going to have to just tell them. by dddiamonddd (Sun 21st Mar 2021 4:18pm)

I walked up to the top of Glennifer Braes, looked out across Paisley-ish, and could hear a shittonne of fireworks, and couldn't see a single one. Fucking idiots. by dddiamonddd (Mon 22nd Mar 2021 9:19am)

They're meant to. by dddiamonddd (Mon 22nd Mar 2021 8:30pm)

When I was 12, I was scooting in and out of Glasgow on the regular on the train to go to the Catty Unders. Literally not a single adult ever questioned me and I seriously do not see why they should have. plus, I can't tell apart a 12 year old from a 16 year old these days. If they've got make-up on, that's it, I'm fucked. 12 year olds don't do make-up like I used to - it was CLEAR I was 12 when you looked at my attempts. by dddiamonddd (Mon 22nd Mar 2021 8:30pm)

Can I ask which meeting this was? Which committee & date and time? I want to have a look at their minutes. by dddiamonddd (Wed 31st Mar 2021 4:44pm)

Ahhh I see! I wonder if they'll mention your meeting in one of the upcoming committees. by dddiamonddd (Wed 31st Mar 2021 5:57pm)

Patric Cross tho? When Partick is written right there on the map? by dddiamonddd (Thu 1st Apr 2021 1:48pm)

> Argyll Street It's Argyle. by dddiamonddd (Wed 14th Apr 2021 4:03pm)

I am a ginger and have not yet had COVID. ergo, the only reasonable assumption is that no, it does not. by dddiamonddd (Fri 14th May 2021 9:18pm)

Especially when they hear you're also Scottish and suddenly decide that means you have to be best pals and spend the rest of the holiday together. Fuck offfffffffffffffffff. We would not be pals had we met in Glasgow, why the fuck would we be pals now? by dddiamonddd (Sun 16th May 2021 12:03pm)

>Not the club itself who once again played no role in the scenes of yesterday Arguably, if the club doesn't strongly (and I mean STRONGLY) condemn the fans who did this and, where feasible, actually enact a punishment (like cancelling season tickets, banning them from attending games, whatever is doable), then the club tacitly endorses the behaviour. I get that people will disagree with that view, but I don't think it's unreasonable. I certainly didn't see the strong condemnation I'd have liked the last time they did this. by dddiamonddd (Sun 16th May 2021 12:06pm)

The population of the cities skew young. People in their 20s and 30s haven't generally been offered the vaccine yet. Hence, low vaccination rates. by dddiamonddd (Sun 23rd May 2021 4:50pm)

Yeah I find it really strange that they want to get everything opened up again, despite pubs, restaurants, gyms, retail, etc being primarily staffed by people who aren't vaccinated yet. I understand wanting to vaccinate the most at risk, but I feel like it should have gone from explicitly high risk people, then people in high-contact/high-risk jobs like supermarket staff, teaching, nursing, care homes, etc. since that would have made it safer to open up schools and such again, then start from 18-29 to cover the majority of staff in the "non-essential" sectors. It's all well and good that Brenda and Mary, in their 50s, are vaccinated, but they're not immune and that means they could be going for brunch and bringing the virus to Stephanie, 23, who's effectively last in line to get a vaccine and will come into contact (briefly, but contact nonetheless) with many other similarly unvaccinated people through the course of her shift. If someone can give me a good reason as to why it didn't go like that, I'd love to hear it. by dddiamonddd (Sun 23rd May 2021 5:13pm)

says you. by dddiamonddd (Tue 25th May 2021 3:15pm)

> Like I get your point but they were old enouigh that they've been told not to be twats more than enough already. Or maybe they haven't been because folk like you decide you're not gonna do anything about it and instead leave them to it and avoid the area. by dddiamonddd (Wed 2nd Jun 2021 10:51pm)

There are people who live a lot closer to London who have commutes of 2-3 hours each way except it's via trains. London commuters are hardcore in terms what they'll tolerate. by dddiamonddd (Fri 4th Jun 2021 12:49pm)

> in London doing admin work Yeah, because you were doing admin work. They don't generally pay a premium on work that they don't view as "specialised". I find it disgusting that they don't, since London is expensive to live in for everyone, not just people at senior level, but that's the reality of it. by dddiamonddd (Fri 4th Jun 2021 12:51pm)

They literally create the traffic they're trying to avoid by cutting into the traffic. Sometimes I've seen the traffic get flowing again and them some twat zooms up the city centre exit lane and pushes in and causes someone to brake and oops, the traffic is back. by dddiamonddd (Tue 8th Jun 2021 9:13am)

The bit that's being discussed is absolutely not a bit intended for zipper merging - it is an exit lane from the motorway. It should only be getting used by people exiting the motorway at the city centre. I am very much an advocate for people leaving sufficient gaps and learning how to zipper merge, but I'd much rather people respect that some lanes are *not* for skipping (and then causing) traffic. Especially since the person who tries to skip sometimes doesn't manage to find a gap and ends up stopping at the end of the lane, impeding anyone trying to use that lane for its intended purpose - leaving the motorway. by dddiamonddd (Tue 8th Jun 2021 9:16am)

Ryde Hairdressing on Clarkston Road looks to be quite good! At least based on what I've seen on Facebook. I'm sus of Curlach because the stylists in there seem to just do the same haircut on everyone, but I've seen photos of Ryde's cuts for people with very similar hair to mine and it turned out really well. by dddiamonddd (Mon 21st Jun 2021 3:59pm)

No shit mate - I know that their specialty is curly hair. That's why I considered them - the problem is that they seem to do (based on their Instagram - which I would say should be representative of their work!) precisely the same haircut on everyone who comes in with curly hair and it's not a hairstyle I want for my own curly hair. by dddiamonddd (Mon 21st Jun 2021 5:10pm)

Especially considering they also insist on having music on and so that needs to be loud as fuck so they can hear it over their car. Their hearing must be absolutely fucked. by dddiamonddd (Fri 16th Jul 2021 3:04pm)

I went there and asked for them to pierce my right nostril. The guy said "lesbians have pierced right nostrils - are you a lesbian?". I was 16 and so taken aback that I went "no???" and he went ahead and pierced my left nostril. This was 11 years ago, but still... by dddiamonddd (Sat 17th Jul 2021 1:44pm)

Scotrail has a handy dandy thing called a website that lets you put in the stations and it'll tell you when all the trains are between those stations, including connections if you need to change. Have you tried that? by dddiamonddd (Sat 17th Jul 2021 1:42pm)

Yeah I went to Nirvana to get my septum pierced about 6 months later and they were absolutely leagues ahead of Blancolo. Helpful, informative, everything I could have wanted. Glad I got past the "oh but it's more than £10..." thought that I had! by dddiamonddd (Sun 18th Jul 2021 2:18pm)

> I think this is the first (presumably) Scottish incident. Uh oh. Are you new to the Scottish end of the internet, mate? by dddiamonddd (Mon 19th Jul 2021 10:50am)

Also there's groups called Brilliant Bartering. A whole network of them. by dddiamonddd (Tue 27th Jul 2021 12:54pm)

fancy meeting you here out in the wilds of ye olde reddit. by dddiamonddd (Tue 27th Jul 2021 4:49pm)

They won't help if the reason you're becoming homeless is because you won't even try to find a flat outside of one of the pricier areas of Glasgow. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 1:13pm)

10+ years ago that wouldn't have been tolerated? Sorry but that's a pile of absolute bullshit. I've had this happen to me semi-regularly from the age of 13 (that's 14 years ago) right up until now. I looked 13 when I was 13, to be clear, and coming out of Catty unders at 9pm ish and waiting for a train by myself in Central, I've had plenty of grown men approach me to say similar things to me and most of the time, absolutely fucking nobody intervened. This isn't new. Not by ANY means. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 5:35pm)

It's been like this for at least 14-15 years in my personal experience. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 5:53pm)

They were saying that it wouldn't have been tolerated in town 10-20 years ago. Definition of rose coloured glasses, frankly. It's "tolerated" now, it was "tolerated" then, it was certainly going to be "tolerated" more than 20 years ago. It's a total misunderstanding of what it's like being a woman in the city. Men are full of the "make a scene!" advice with no regard for just how fucking scary this can be. I wish I'd made a scene every time a man like the one in the video has approached me. It's difficult to do because how do I know how this guy will react? Do I know if anyone around us will actually do anything? Because I've made a scene and gotten fuck all reaction. I got straight up flashed by a guy in Central (9 years ago now - I was not long turned 18) and I started shouting and running away and what happened? The guy followed me with his dick out, laughing, and people gave him a fucking wide berth. He bolted when I started running up the escalators shouting for the BTP. Everyone wants to believe they'd intervene if they saw anything like this happening, but my experience is that they mostly don't. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 5:52pm)

Ever since I started going to the Catty Unders 14 years ago, til now, I can tell you fine well that it's not just Asian men. Plenty of white Scottish guys in my experience. The only difference is that it seems like people are *marginally* more likely to intervene when it's been an Asian guy, which you can read into however you like. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 5:55pm)

And I can only say who I've literally been on the receiving end of this shite from. People are much quicker to be suspicious of interactions between white women and Asian men than they are when it's been a white guy. But I can tell you that I have had plenty of harassment off of white guys that other white guys have written off as banter, just having a laugh, etc. Seems white guys are more forgiving of what other white guys do. Appreciate the intervention, but would prefer if it was done more consistently against anyone who's being a creep, and not just people you're already more suspicious of. And the St Enoch centre is so far from the only place harassment is happening mate. At this point, I don't think I know of a single part of Glasgow I haven't had some kind of harassment off guys of all races. 🤷‍♀️ by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 6:06pm)

Can we stop pretending that somehow 20 years ago things were better? Where were these mythical batterers on a Saturday night when I was 13 in Central, surrounded by adults on their way to their night out, and I was getting crept on by some guy 2-3-4 times my age? by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 6:16pm)

It's weird how *not bothered* I am by that happening to me. I know in my heart I should be, but I'm not? Because it just feels so... mundane? Like this is just a thing to expect, a thing that inevitably happens sometimes and it happened to me once. Because something like it, maybe not as "bad", has happened to me regularly for 14 years and it'll continue to happen for possibly the rest of my life. And it shouldn't feel so fucking mundane, but it does. I'm not traumatised, I'm just tired of it. But maybe that is a manifestation of trauma - my inability to get really raging when it happens to me. Every instance of it, while often scary at the time, just blurs into this almost boring narrative of how I go out and sometimes I get harassed. I go for a run, someone leans out of their van and shouts nice arse at me. I go to the gym, some guy is burning a hole in my crotch with his stare. I go to a shop and a guy tries to get past me but puts his hands on me. I stand and wait for a taxi, some guy wants me to go home with him and *will not take no for an answer*. Shouldn't be boring, but it is. The "mostly Asian guys do this" narrative is winding me the fuck up. Also that it's apparently *only* at St Enoch's? fucking haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. That's a funny joke. Smells like confirmation bias to me, frankly, because my personal experience has been that Asian guys are a minority. White guys just get away with it under the guise of banter, just having a laugh, "he just fancies you", IF anyone even intervenes at all. I've had LOADS of creepy interactions in pubs and I can tell you that was almost exclusively white guys! Inside a nightclub? White guys! It's almost like white guys are the majority of guys in Scotland, who knew! But if they're primed to view Asian guys as creeps, it isn't a shock that they more closely scrutinise any interaction they see between a white woman and an Asian guy and therefore realising they're witnessing creepy behaviour more often. I wonder how many times they've walked past a white guy being a fucking predator and not thought to look twice because she was trying to quietly encourage him to fuck off out of fear of how he might react if she makes a scene? Willing to bet it was *far* more than they'd ever estimate (mostly because they'll estimate it at fuckin zero because they're all bold as fuck and will intervene *any* time they see creepy behaviour, obviously). I feel like that particular Venn diagram might be approaching a circle. And I expect I'm gonna have someone in my DMs having a go at me for that one. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 6:35pm)

Get help for what, exactly? Do you think this sort of response is helpful to anyone? To tell a woman who is telling you about her experience of who is committing harassment and where it is happening that she should "get help" when she's saying that her personal experience of harassment doesn't line up with what *you* have observed, as a person who is not the target of the average predator in town? Because if you want me to believe you give the remotest fuck about my safety, the least you could do is not be outright dismissive of me when I'm telling you about my personal experiences of harassment in Glasgow. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 6:43pm)

Yeeeeah, I figured! Mostly just replying at this point for the benefit of anyone who is reading this guy's pish and wondering if he has a point. Feels prudent to make sure people see the perspective of some women here, rather than just this legion of guys who think that what they've observed is somehow the be all and end all of it! by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 7:01pm)

I like how this comment is "controversial". Us silly women thinking we can correct the narrative on who exactly is harassing us! by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 7:09pm)

Being noisy and making a scene has: 1. Most of the time not really gotten much of a reaction from anyone else. Some stares, but not much in the way of actual intervention from anyone else. 2. Gotten me slapped, kicked, and punched on different occasions. 3. Threatened with a knife. So strangely enough, I've got what I feel like is good reason to feel terrified of making a scene. Sometimes all that feels safe is to stall and try to move the entire interaction to somewhere that's busier. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 7:11pm)

No, I really don't think it's worse now and I don't understand what basis you think you have to make that claim? I think that what's been happening to us women is now more visible to men because we talk about it and post about it on social media. You think it's worse but I feel like it's as bad as it's always been and I feel like I have a far better grounding to say that than you do. Do you have any sort of citation for your allegation that sex crimes are massively on the rise? Sorry to burst this anti-Asian guy circlejerk you've all got going on here, but I have (and continue to) experience substantially more harassment from white Scottish guys than I have experienced it from Asian guys. You are primed to see Asian men as potential perpetrators, so you think you see it happening more often with Asian men involved because you're more likely to scrutinise an interaction that's on-going. But I would absolutely put money on you just not paying that much attention to interactions between white women and white men, and so you don't see it. Because we (as in women) often try not to make too much of a scene because making a scene can be dangerous for us. And sometimes just plain does fuck all to get rid of the creep. I've had white guys being a creep, I've made a scene, and all that's happened is that other white guys say "aw he just fancies you!!!", "aw it's just banter!", "it's a compliment!" and I'm just being a bitch, especially when he's a 20-something normal looking white guy and everyone around looks just like him. 20 years ago they were fucking not quicker to call this out. Otherwise I wouldn't have countless memories of being harassed by adult men when I was 13 (and fucking looked 13, btw, absolutely no plausible deniability there for anyone) where other adults (particularly adult men) did nothing whatsoever to intervene. Often just staring, maybe commenting amongst themselves, but otherwise leaving the creepy bastard to it. Anyone who thinks it was "better" 10 or 20 years ago is deluding themselves. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 8:11pm)

So now we're shifting the goalposts. This ENTIRE thread is about sexual harassment and sexual assault in the context of women going about their lives. Rape is, statistically, committed by a person known to the victim - a partner, a friend, a co-worker, a family member - not a random person on the street. > In terms of figures to prove what I'm saying. There Re publicly available datasets from the government regarding crime which can be sliced and diced by ethnicity age etc. So cite them. To quote rape crisis back at you: > Sexual crimes decreased by 1% from 13,547 to 13,364. This is the first year since 2008-09 that sexual crimes haven’t increased, though these crimes remain at the second highest level seen since 1971, the first year for which comparable groups are available. Now, let's put our thinking hats on here. Sexual crime statistics are made up of *reported* crimes. It is well known that many sexual crimes go unreported. I have actually never reported a single one of the myriad of things that have happened to me that would actually constitute a sexual crime. The closest I ever came to that was running to get the BTP in Central when a guy flashed me and tried to get up against me. I bolted, got BTP, they went downstairs to find the guy. I waited for 10 mins, they never came back, I went home because I was about to miss my train. I have no idea if that was ever actually recorded anywhere to end up in a statistic. I know this to be the case for every woman I've spoken to about this kind of thing. We don't report the vast majority of things that happen to us. Those of us who do have often had negative experiences with the police about it. Just the other a day, someone I have on Facebook posted a memory about how she got assaulted by a guy, she finally contacted police the next day after being encouraged by friends, and the police accosted her for not phoning them straight afterwards and all she ever heard about it was a number for Victims Support a few months later. It isn't exactly encouraging to report anything else that might happen to you if that's all that happens. However, in recent years, there's been movements like #metoo that have encouraged us to speak out about it when it happens and that has had some impact on women's willingness to go to police. This will, naturally, mean that *reported* sexual crimes could increase purely from this. Has the increase been attributable to this? Unsure. Oh look, this is handy, RapeCrisis even have statistics for whether victims reported what was done to them to police. So, this is only half of the people that they were able to find out if they had or hadn't reported it. > Where this was known, only just over half of survivors (50.35%) seeking support from rape crisis centres in 2019-20 in Scotland had reported to the police. [Source: Rape Crisis Scotland Annual Report for 2019-20 - publication imminent] > Sexual abuse occurs more often in the survivor’s home than in any other location (just over 37%) [Source: Rape Crisis Scotland Annual Report for 2019-20] Now, this is for England and Wales, but I can't imagine the situation is vastly different here: https://rapecrisis.org.uk/get-informed/about-sexual-violence/statistics-sexual-violence/ > Only around 15% of those who experience sexual violence report to the police > Approximately 90% of those who are raped know the perpetrator prior to the offence So what we have here is: chronic under-reporting of crimes, which means it can be difficult to parse out whether increases in reported crimes are due to a increased willingness to report in the first place or due to an actual increase in the occurence of the crime. And however smart you think you are, you don't know this and I would argue that we can't really know which it is with any certainty. We can't use contacting RapeCrisis or a similar organisation as a benchmark either, because the same movements that encourage us to report what happened also encourage us to seek help for it too. I think trying to point at Asian guys and say they're doing all the rapes is a fucking dog whistle, frankly. Because virtually all of my experience of sexual harassment, sexual assault, and, unfortunately for me, rape has involved a white guy. I haven't exactly been out and about as normal given COVID, but every single instance of outright sexual harassment I've experienced in the past 2-3 years has been a white guy. This shouldn't be a shock since Scotland is like 95% white or something. Why are you so fucking pressed by a woman saying that this problem has always existed and has never been attributable to one racial group? You can go "ah but culture!" but you can fuck off with that. What's the reasoning for all the various white guys who've groped me, rubbed up against me with an erection in a nightclub, tried to put their hand up my skirt on a train, followed me home while telling me all the explicit things he'd like to do to me? Why are we not questioning whether the culture of white Scottish guys is causing them to be fucking predators? I'd really prefer we don't focus in on one demographic because, frankly, it feels like you're at risk of ignoring the majority of predators in Scotland. > But honestly. Go to the sandy Ford ask the nurses there at reception they'll tell you outright they told me that's what they see on the frontline day in day out. The receptionists at Sandyford are not typically nurses. And the fuck are you doing going into Sandyford and asking the receptionists about the demographics of rapists? Do you have no consideration for who might be around you when you're asking those questions? People visit Sandyford for crisis care and you're trying to chat rape demographics potentially in earshot of a rape victim. Classy. I don't understand for the life of me what would possess you to do that. I've never in my 10+ years of attending Sandyford to get various forms of care spoken to the receptionist about anything in detail. They don't ask very many questions at all - last time I was there, they got me to fill out a form that they didn't acknowledge the contents of except if I missed something. So I feel like you might be at it if you think you've had a chat with Sandyford receptionists about who has been raping the people who go there for care in a crisis. My experience of them is that they're incredibly discrete and would absolutely not be chatting to some random cunt that's wandered in and been like "sooooo who's raping the people who come to visit Sandyford for crisis care?". And if they are, congrats, you've just undermined my trust in Sandyford as an entity. So I really hope you're lying there. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 9:11pm)

Virtually every man who has ever sexually assaulted me has been a white Scottish guy. Unsure of class, but given where it happened, probs not part of the landed gentry. Time to criminalise white guys, I guess. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 9:47pm)

You'd lose that bet. Listen to women when we're telling you that it's always been bad. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 9:45pm)

Did you pay absolutely fuckin no attention to any of the rest of this thread? by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 9:52pm)

If we're going to profile sexual assaulters, I suggest we start with white Scottish guys, as virtually everyone who has ever harassed or assaulted me has been a white guy with a Scottish accent. There's a fuck load more of them out and about, especially given that 95% of Scotland is white! by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 9:49pm)

So let's criminalise white working class men. Lots of them are probably some form of Christian too, so let's chuck that in there. Same principle, is it not? Because I'm 99% sure the white guys who assaulted me are working class and they're probably Christian because most of us are raised Christian even if lots of us don't practice it. If you object to me saying that I'm gonna profile all white working class men as rapists, you should see why it's fucking weird to start profiling Asian guys as rapists too. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 10:17pm)

Never said they don't count. I said the data in them needs to be looked at with some level of nuance. Namely about what could be driving that. Because one of the biggest factors in statistics of *reported* crimes is whether those crimes *are actually being reported in the first place*. And if you give the slightest solitary fuck about solving the problem of rape and sexual assault, you HAVE to consider the objective fact that lots of it goes unreported and encouraging victims to report crimes against them means that there could well be a rise in reported crimes even where the *actual* occurence of crime on, say, a per 100k basis or some other measure isn't changing (or it's potentially even decreasing - it's difficult to know). Dunno what's hard about that for you to understand. > I have family / friends who work there and told me that in private. Never felt an inclination to dox someone til now. Because holy fuck, they SHOULD NOT be telling you fucking anything about their work. Half tempted to contact Sandyford frankly and suggest they start looking hard at their staff members because it is OBJECTIVELY unethical for them to tell you anything about the people they're dealing with. You know fine well what I'm saying, it just doesn't fit with your narrative. Don't pretend you give the slightest fuck about my safety. by dddiamonddd (Wed 11th Aug 2021 10:22pm)

The fact that you think I'm suggesting we "do nothing" tells me how much of a shit you give about solving the problem of sexual assault. In that you don't give a shit. Because if you did, you would listen to women who are telling you that the problem is so far from being isolated to Asian guys. Branding Asian guys as the villains at fault for the problem distracts from the fact that white guys do it too. Women all over this thread are telling you we've had more harassment and assault from white guys. Everyone's going on about "Asian cultures" - white guys in Scotland are misogynists too, y'know. Culturally, white people don't see value in women who dress in skimpy clothes and behave like "sluts". Because that's a thing men do. It's men. Not any specific type of man. Listen to us if you want us to believe you give a fuck about our safety. Otherwise, stop fucking virtue signalling as a disguise for your racism. by dddiamonddd (Thu 12th Aug 2021 7:46am)

Sorry, fucking what? It's "derailment" for me to ask that we don't put a disproportionate level of focus onto a tiny minority of people who harass women? Men have some fucking cheek to say women are derailing the conversation about our safety hahaha. Fucking hell mate. Think about what you're saying here. Maybe context is hard for you, but I was NOT saying we should criminalise all white men. I was pointing out that, as you have JUST demonstrated, it is fucking absurd to pretend that a vague profile like "white working class Scottish man" or indeed "young Asian immigrant" is at all helpful in combating this. People were talking about profiling them and running informational campaigns telling "potential victims" to avoid them. Do you not see the hypocrisy in you suggesting that my (deliberately absurd) suggestion is absurd, while tacitly suggesting the same thing when it isn't white Scottish guys is not absurd? >Nobody here thinks white guys are perfect Have a read through the entire thread. I've had a number of arguments with people who have said that every time they've seen it happening, it's been Asian guys. And when women have said "it's not just Asian guys", they've argued back. Like you're doing right now. >although I’ve no idea why you make it a class issue? Snobbery much? So here you go struggling with context. I said working class because the guy I responded to said the following things: >We can safely profile these men and stop them. **If the men were white working class** you would do the same. You now have a profile of the type of men we're looking for. Don't play dumb. and >When you profile it's not just skin color it's age, areas where the attacks are frequently taking place the **social; economic backgrounds** of these men. Emphasis mine. Feel free to read the entire thread before you latch onto a single part of what I said (again, the *deliberately absurd* thing I said). >The point is there is an education that needs to take place that’s already happened for most shithead white guys who just don’t listen. The guy in question most likely hasn’t had such an education being in a completely alien country and culture so that’s what we should be aiming to do. Considering our culture rewards misogyny, denigrates women, etc. we have some fucking cheek to think that teaching them our culture, which is permeated by the "lad culture" that's often behind the sexual harassment and assault I've experienced at the hands of young white guys, will somehow solve things. Focusing on educating a minority of the population while the majority cuts about acting like an arsehole is a waste of effort. It is hyper focusing on a small aspect of the problem, lumping resources and time into something that, ultimately, will not materially impact the wider problem of sexual harassment and assault. &#x200B; >Not ignoring it for woke points cos some bam gave you grief whenever ago. Oh okay, I don't get to talk about the demographics of who is actually causing me and other women harm, but you get to ignore the fact that "some bams" are routinely sexually harassing women because you'd rather focus on educating a minority of people that you've disproportionately assigned blame for sexual assault and harassment to? Nice. I'd also like to point out that the people who are committing sexual harassment and assault against women are actually mostly not "bams". They've been men in nice suits, they've been pretty average looking guys on a night out with "the lads", they've been metalheads, they have indeed sometimes been bams, but they've been across the entire spectrum of subcultures that exist in Scotland. Because that's the thing - it is not and never has been just ONE culture or subculture. It's a wider problem with how a subset of men view women, it's a problem with "lad culture" and a culture that rewards men for their sexual "prowess" and denigrates women for ours. It's a culture that tells women we should take cat calling as a compliment, and tells men that persistence is a virtue (see: tv shows, films, etc that position it as romantic to persist). But it is ever so helpful for women, when do-good men like yourself are telling us we're derailing the conversation ABOUT THE THINGS THAT HAPPEN TO US because we have the audacity to actually tell you *what* is happening to us and *who* is doing it and then you pat yourself on the back for telling us off for our "derailment". You really are a man looking out for women everywhere when you tell us to stop telling you that you are focusing on the wrong thing. by dddiamonddd (Thu 12th Aug 2021 9:08am)

> If you want to challenge the veracity of them please feel free, they are the government's not mine. I am literally not challenging the veracity of the information. I am challenging how YOU are applying that information. If you don't disagree that the thing driving the 'increase' in rape in Scotland could be attributable to an increase in reporting it... why are you all over this thread being like THERE'S A MASSIVE INCREASE IN RAPE AND IT'S BECAUSE OF ASIAN GUYS? Pretty fucking alarmist sounding if you genuinely think that there's a solid chance that the statistics show an increase because of increased trust in the police to deal with sexual crimes. You're weaponising statistics you claim you are claiming to understand the nuance in and presenting them without that nuance. >As for the friend who works there. They didn't tell me a single thing about anyone. Not one specific comment about any particular case, person, nothing. Not a single detail. Eh, except apparently the demographic of who is raping people? They told you nothing, but apparently your receptionist pal who, AGAIN, gets to know virtually nothing about what is said in the room with nurses and doctors, also managed to tell you demographic information of rapists? You're at it mate. >They told me that generally the amount of people who are victims reporting assaults by Asian men is vastly on the rise. That is all. They are one of the most ethical people I know. They would never tell me anything about anyone they worked with for whatever reason or whatever their situation was. They are not ethical if they are talking to you about fucking anything that is told to them in confidence, however vaguely they allegedly do so. >Shame on you for feeling the inclination to dox someone online for pointing out facts that are confirmed by official government figures. Shame on me for wanting to identify who within Sandyford is breaching the trust placed in them by the people who go to Sandyford? Oh yeah, I'm the big ethical problem here. Certainly not the people who are apparently telling you the things they've allegedly found out in the course of their job that deals with highly sensitive situations and traumatised people. Because, mate, I don't want to dox you because you're citing government statistics. I want to dox you so I can find out who within Sandyford is acting massively unethically. Because you've said it's friends and family members, so if I found out who you are, it wouldn't then be too difficult to identify who is talking to you about the confidential information they've got absolutely no right to share with you. &#x200B; >Also, it doesn't have to be you I'm caring about. It's everyone I know and care about as much as young men and women that I don't know. Is it so bad I want to stop people being sexually assaulted for gods sake Jesus fuck mate. Way to twist this into being about you! Show me where I said it was bad to want to stop people being sexually assaulted? I would LOVE if I could cut about the city with absolutely no fear of harassment or assault. Amazing how you've been told "hey could you please stop hyper focusing on a minority of predatory people (which is in and of itself a minority of a small minority) and think more broadly about the issue" and you've decided I'm saying "FUCK OFF DON'T DO ANYTHING TO STOP SEXUAL ASSAULT". Literally all that you are being asked to do is to stop marching around pretending Asian men are the problem when it is men of *all* demographics, and it is primarily white men. If you could somehow fix whatever drives white guys to sexually harass and assault people, you have now prevented the overwhelming majority of sexual crimes that are committed by adult men against women in Scotland. If the measures used to address the broader issue don't work on a particular demographic, then sure, let's consider if we can come up with something to address whatever made that demographic not respond to the wider efforts. But we haven't exactly made a tonne of effort to address the wider problem, so we don't get to hyper focus on a tiny aspect of it just yet. by dddiamonddd (Thu 12th Aug 2021 9:25am)

You've got some fucking cheek to say I'm full of shit when you apparently don't understand the issue you're hammering your chest about. Get off your fucking high horse and listen to women about what is happening to us. Absolute waste of space. You're doing fuck all to help us. And I'm going to block you now, because if you can't wrap your wee brain around what my point is now, after I've repeated it so many times, you're never gonna get it. Because you don't give a fuck to understand it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 12th Aug 2021 9:51am)

2 of 2. > You seem to be of the opinion that our culture is just as bad if not worse than that of the mostly Middle Eastern cultures these men come from. That we have no moral high ground in which to educate them. You are quite frankly wrong and I’ve no idea why you approach this problem with such futility. Didn't say it was just as bad or worse. Nor am I approaching it with "futility". I'm saying that it is hypocritical to have glaring problems with misogyny in our own culture and be doing little to re-shape the view Scottish men hold of women, while funnelling loads of resources trying to re-educate into a tiny minority of people. That time and money and effort would have a bigger impact on the overall ocurrence of sexual crimes if we spread the efforts across the wider population. The term "rape culture" feels relevant here. Clearly not every man is a predator, but a lot of men unintentionally reinforce a culture that validates predators. Things like rape jokes, sexist jokes, calling women sluts, etc. Casual misogyny, whether you want to admit it or not, provides part of the foundation for the misogyny that leads to direct harm to women. When a guy repeatedly approaches a woman in a nightclub, gets knocked back, goes in for a kiss or a grab of the arse, gets slapped, and goes back to his laughing pals, he's just had it reinforced that there are no social consequences for him when he sexually assaults a woman. Sure, she slapped him, but his pals didn't go "you fucking arsehole what the fuck are you doing?", they responded "hahahaha you got knocked back hahaha" (and in case you want to question this - I've seen this happen multiple times where I'm the one that slapped the guy) because lots of men don't treat this stuff with the seriousness they should. > I think it’s sensible to single out young immigrant men for education on how to approach and treat women as they do in other countries as there is clearly a problem here with some as there is in other countries. It’s not absurd to assume these people need help integrating and neither is it unhelpful to do so. The thing I don't understand is how, exactly, you propose to do this? Send a wee letter out to everyone who responds to the census saying they're a male with an Asian background with a "hello, we have assumed that there's no way you might know how to behave in Scotland because you're *a particular type of foreign*, please attend a class on how to not be a rapist, Kind regards, Scottish Government"? That's fucking insulting for the vast majority of Asian people who are perfectly good people. What would this education entail? "In this country, we don't go up to women and repeatedly ask them for sex. Except when we do...". Because regardless of the specific cultural differences - what the guy in the video is doing has been done to me plenty of times by a white Scottish guy. Nothing in the video is actually unique to Asian guys. We'd be lying if we tried to suggest that these things are just not done here, because they are. White guys calling women sluts and feeling like they're entitled to sex because she's "dressed like a slut" happens aaaalllll the time. Plenty of white guys have fundamentally exactly the same view. We're being delusional if we try to pretend that it's all down to "foreign cultures". If someone is in their 20s and beyond and hasn't yet taken on board that they can't harrass women via women telling them to repeatedly go away, I'd much rather get them done criminally and enact actual consequences, so we should focus on giving police the resources to deal with these crimes instead of taking the report and sending you off with a crime reference and a number for Victim Support. I honestly think it's far better to start young, and this comes back to my point about the time and effort being better spent on more general efforts. People move here and they have kids, those kids go to school along with all the future White Guys of Scotland. Do the work when they're young, have school be a good influence on them as they grow up, reinforce respect and everyone's right to dignity throughout their 10+ years at school. > I just don’t get your argument that because some white guys are vile arseholes we shouldn’t bother or have no right to educate others. Might be because that's literally not my argument. Educate others, but don't laser focus on a tiny minority of people at the expense of dealing with the wider problem. If efforts to deal with the wider problem make no material impact to the occurence of sexual crimes within a particular community, regroup and reassess what would, fine. But right now, I don't think we're making nearly enough effort to address the larger problem that we're at the stage of tailoring it right down to address a very specific demographic. Most of the replies to this post evidences to me that we haven't culturally matured to the point where I can trust that men are holding each other accountable. Lots of "the best thing to do is make a scene/shout sexual assault/start screaming" advice from people who have quite clearly never been in this kind of situation to understand just how scary it is and how difficult it can be to "make a scene". They don't intend to be, but it is patronising as fuck and feels a little bit like there's an implied judgement applied to anyone who doesn't make a scene, and the advice is all round unhelpful because *we know*. Lots of "Asian men are bad for this". Lots of arguing with women, like me and others, who are trying to get the conversation to be about the reality of what is happening to us and who is doing it. The conversation about how to solve the problem of sexual harassment and assault against women should be centered on women. There is absolutely no way that it is reasonable for a guy to tell me I'm derailing the conversation by asking for attention to be paid to the facts of my experience (and of plenty of other women's experiences). by dddiamonddd (Thu 12th Aug 2021 2:18pm)

This is a fuckin doozy of a comment, so I've split it into two. It is not gendered but we would be remiss to pretend that there isn't a pattern to who experiences it the most. Not to mention that there's a very different dynamic at play when we're considering sexual harassment and assault against women versus against men. So much so that I really think they need to be separate conversations so that each issue can be given the proper attention that it needs. > I don’t think I should be silent on the issue just because it disproportionately doesn’t effect me. Show me where I said you should be silent? Be loud about it, the world certainly needs more people loudly talking about it. I'm asking you to *listen* to women though. > I have no problem with you taking about your experiences in this thread. Of course you should. Aside from you calling my comments "derailment". What you say about sexual harassment and assault against women should be informed by women. You do absolutely nothing to help us when we try to engage you in a discussion and you call our contributions to the conversation a "derailment". How can I POSSIBLY be derailing a conversation when I am telling the people in the conversation (that is ostensibly about things that have happened to me and other women and will likely happen to me again) the reality of the very issue that is allegedly being discussed? What use is a conversation about how to reduce sexual harassment and assault when women can't contribute? Who is the conversation for, exactly? > My problem is you posting under every comment chain that mentions there is a specific cultural problem with a minority of immigrants that it’s white men too. Because this laser focus on this minority of immigrants is coming at the expense of discussion about the wider problem. Funnelling time and money and effort into educating a minority of a minority isn't really what is needed. > Nobody is saying it isn’t. Maybe you haven't read every comment on this post, but a highly upvoted comment says this: > Maybe I’ll cop flack for this, but it’s always asian men. Not to say that white folks aren’t being creepy as well, I’m sure they are, but it’s asian men doing this and all you need to do is go to the st Enoch centre on a weekend and see asian guys well into their 20s chatting up girls that look no more than 16. When I responded to say that it's always been primarily white guys in my 14 years of hanging about in and around the city centre, he said: > I can only say what I’ve seen. Wasn’t white guys doing it when I seen it, wasn’t white guys when I’ve seen it outside the st Enoch centre. and then: > Pointing out that when I’ve seen it, it was Asian men, doesn’t mean I’d sit idly by and watch if it wasn’t. Essentially this entire post is *heaving* with men who are insisting that they have only really seen it from Asian guys. They are happy to *speculate* that white guys do it too, but he's never seen it. Now, this is confirmation bias at work in my eyes - they are primed to view an Asian guy as a predator and so they scrutinise the interaction more than they would if they saw a white guy and a white woman together. Pretty sure the vast majority of people will just saunter on past a situation that is uncomfortable for someone involved where they're both white because, frankly, it doesn't look "out of place" to people and it's well known that women (as much as we want to all believe we'd have the guy's baws ripped off the instant he crossed the line) don't often feel safe to "make a scene". Sometimes it requires a bit of scrutiny to notice that a situation is uncomfortable. But given that 90%+ of the country is white, by mere statistical probability, that guy **has** wandered on past a situation that he could have intervened in, but he didn't because he didn't really look too closely at it. Because it's unremarkable when a white man is interacting with a white woman in public. There's a distinct desire that I'm seeing to try and place a large portion of the blame onto Asian guys - see also the guy cutting about stating that statistics show that allegedly most rapes are being committed by Asian guys as evidence that rapes are endemic on the streets of Glasgow, but also ignoring statistics that say that 90% of victims already knew their rapist in some capacity (statistically, a rapist is a friend, a partner, a co-worker, a family member, etc. not a random person on the street), and that the statistics are all *reported* crimes. The vast majority of sexual crimes go unreported - Rape Crisis England summarised statistics that suggested only 15% of them get reported at all. by dddiamonddd (Thu 12th Aug 2021 2:18pm)

did they not change a lot of pedestrian crossings to be touchless because of COVID? so the lights would just change automatically on a timer instead of pedestrians having to touch the button. Did they maybe do that there? by dddiamonddd (Fri 13th Aug 2021 2:14pm)

Aye the way locking up my bike was explained to me was "make your bike look more annoying to steal than the rest of the bikes on the rack". Kinda sad that I was setting it up to be like "steal the other bike", but there'll *always* be someone using a £5 cable lock to distract from my bike... by dddiamonddd (Fri 13th Aug 2021 8:57pm)

>Nite: Bike thief's are the lowest folk on the planet. Bike *thieves* are indeed arseholes... but I can think of a lot of types of people I'd put below them... by dddiamonddd (Fri 13th Aug 2021 9:01pm)

Why not both? I've been to Liverpool and Leeds (and many other cities besides, in and out of Scotland) for work. I actively see more arsehole behaviour in Glasgow than I do elsewhere. It's not that there's no arseholes anywhere else, but the sheer volume that exist in Glasgow is just incredible. by dddiamonddd (Fri 13th Aug 2021 9:00pm)

wait what? you said BroomieLaw & York Street in your original comment. by dddiamonddd (Sat 14th Aug 2021 7:50pm)

Cities tend to be warmer than surrounding areas - the buildings generate a surprising amount of heat and block a lot of wind that would otherwise cool the air. The ground tends to run a little warmer too. So it means Glasgow can be surrounded by snow but the city itself gets rain! by dddiamonddd (Mon 13th Sep 2021 9:16am)

You're naive as fuck if you think the police are gonna rush out to this situation. by dddiamonddd (Tue 14th Sep 2021 11:29pm)

Barrhead is absolutely fine. by dddiamonddd (Fri 1st Oct 2021 5:48pm)

*Flats*? Houses, maybe, there's some very nice houses around Barrhead but where are flats going for £500k? by dddiamonddd (Fri 1st Oct 2021 5:49pm)

Looks like recent-ish sales put the flats there at about £260k at the top end. Only the houses seem to be above £500k, and that's not a shock for that bit to be fair. Those houses are stunning. For comparison though - my flat is about £60k (going by what the one across the landing went for, that's identical but flipped) and I'm closer to the station. There's quite a gulf in prices here. by dddiamonddd (Fri 1st Oct 2021 6:02pm)

I moved here 5 years ago and when I said I was moving, you'd think I'd announced I was on my way to Syria... Everyone who has been over here since has marvelled that it's clearly not the warzone they'd thought. by dddiamonddd (Fri 1st Oct 2021 7:42pm)

What's your point? 5 years in Barrhead and zero issues. Pal moved to a fancy bit of the West End and had an altercation with a steaming bam within a matter of weeks. It's almost as if there's nowhere that's immune to steaming folk being arseholes? But some steaming neighbours doesn't make the entire place a shithole. by dddiamonddd (Fri 1st Oct 2021 10:35pm)

Most people keep their car keys somewhere accessible near the front door. It doesn't really take much effort to work out where someone's keys are. by dddiamonddd (Sat 2nd Oct 2021 11:38am)

There are not "5000 high paying jobs" going into that building. There'll be a shittonne of 21k jobs (which they already have people in, for the most part) going in there though. by dddiamonddd (Tue 12th Oct 2021 11:12pm)

[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22821639](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22821639) Cats don't travel far mate. by dddiamonddd (Wed 20th Oct 2021 9:22pm)

Councils have a lot of income streams beyond council tax - there's no way to identify what proportion of a specific council tax payment is "for" bin collection and if you were to do it proportionally, based on Cost of Bin Collection over Total Income to get a proportion, it would be tiny. Technically absolutely none of it is "for" anything at all, it's just income for the Council. The income is not restricted (in the accounting sense). by dddiamonddd (Tue 26th Oct 2021 8:15pm)

The financial statements of all councils are audited and published by Audit Scotland. They're available for you to look at if you want to. by dddiamonddd (Wed 27th Oct 2021 7:25pm)

The water and sewerage bit goes to Scottish Water. Although it appears on your Council Tax bill and is collected with your Council Tax, Water and Sewerage is not "Council Tax" at all. It is an entirely separate charge that is collected by the Council on behalf of Scottish Water, is remitted to Scottish Water in full, and so does not form any part of the council's budget. Councils have basically nothing to do with water and sewerage provisions anywhere in Scotland. It just goes on your Council Tax bill for the sake of ease of administration. The actual Council Tax bit is entirely unrestricted on how it can be spent. by dddiamonddd (Sun 31st Oct 2021 12:09pm)

Jesus christ shut up and go away. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Nov 2021 10:25am)

Never said you have "no right" to be here, I just don't get why you'd bother your arse to come into a subreddit for a place that's fuck all to do with you and try stir up shite when you could just... not. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Nov 2021 10:41am)

Aye let's kid on that's all you've done here. > Scotts My name isn't Scott. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Nov 2021 10:47am)

What is this even supposed to mean? Is this you scrambling to feel like you've won the argument? by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Nov 2021 11:02am)

If it's factual and not somehow protected by some kind of legal gagging order, then you will not be legally liable. Truth is an absolute defence to any accusations of libel. You aren't helping me avoid this person, given what has been said about them - supposedly a photographer. So I avoid Malones... then what? he works elswhere, and I don't know who he is, so I can't really avoid him, can I? So now if I see a photographer in a club or bar, I'm going to be wonder "is it him?". Fab, now my low level anxiety about the general risk of being a woman in a public space is sky high because I know *a photographer* is a predator, but I have no idea which, and here's a photographer floating about in the bar I'm in. This post was fucking redundant without actual useful details. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:01pm)

> Can Malone's even fire him? Are they legally entitled to sack someone over the accusations? If they are a direct employee and employed for under 2 years, someone can be sacked for absolutely any reason at all, including no reason, except for specific protected characteristics (eg. sex, gender, disability, race, etc). If the person in question is a contractor (ie. engaged by the bar and invoices the bar for their services, not directly employed) then the bar is free to just not continue to contract with them, again, for any reason at all or no reason. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:07pm)

Is it not? Because I wouldn't know where to start. There's a lot of photographers in Glasgow, I'm sure. I assure you that I (and all other women) am acutely aware of the fact that predators exist. It's not news to me. But when someone is saying "THERE IS A PREDATOR BEING HIRED BY BARS" and providing a warning that is, ostensibly, about a specific predator that is allegedly going to help me avoid this specific person, but they won't tell me who they are... what use is that to me? How do I do anything with this information? I've never been to Malones. But photographers rarely work for a single venue (and a single venue will even sometimes have more than one photographer), he likely works in all sorts of places. So what, do I now need to visit Malones to see what photographer(s) work in there so I know the candidates? Or what? by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:14pm)

And do we know that it is *that* photographer? Do we know if Malones might use more than one photographer? No, because OP has not confirmed. So we could be assuming it's that guy when it actually isn't, for all that we know. Seems like it has the potential to go badly, don't you think? It's been a while since I was in the Cathouse, for example, but I know that when I went, there was at least 2 photographers they used. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:41pm)

I found the selfie that was referred to, but that doesn't confirm that it is THAT guy that OP is referencing. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:46pm)

How do you know I'm even looking at the correct photo though? And I can't see the guy's name anywhere. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:56pm)

If he is not named, even if Malones pap him out in response to this post, he can just toddle off to some other venue and work there instead and there's plausible deniability again until someone who knows about him grasses him in again. Especially since we don't know how many photographers Malones uses. I am not protected by the vague knowledge there is *a predator somewhere* because, again, no shit, fucking obviously, there's always a predator somewhere. But if there's actual convictions against a guy that says "this guy is a predator" and he is a guy that is in a position of relative trust (people aren't often weird about the photographer in a club after all - we generally regard the staff of bars and clubs as people we should be able to trust) with access to drunk, and therefore more vulnerable, young people, I want to know about it. I want to know who he is. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 1:55pm)

I was literally only addressing a question someone asked that I know the answer to. Anything you inferred from that is your own imagination. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 4:54pm)

I don't know what point you're trying to make here. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Nov 2021 4:50pm)

Most of the Americans saying they're "Scotch" have never actually heard a Scottish person speak in real life, so your theory is pretty much out the window there. by dddiamonddd (Mon 29th Nov 2021 7:05pm)

An onion cut vertically (from the top of the onion, to the root without going through the root) so that it opens up/"blooms" like a lotus. Then you deep fry it. by dddiamonddd (Wed 8th Dec 2021 5:35pm)

I haven't been anywhere near the city centre in a while but I'm 99.99999% sure you're right... by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 5:23pm)

Why are you writing Glaswegian characters in Glasgow if you don't know what Glaswegian people sound like? by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 5:19pm)

This does not sound like a conversation any human would have, never mind a Glaswegian. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 5:55pm)

also, are you aware there is a singer called Cosima? https://www.instagram.com/cos1ma/?hl=en She's from London. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 6:00pm)

Are you sure it was Missing Records you went to? Because when it was under Central, it looked like this: https://www.list.co.uk/place/24689-missing-records-glasgow/ Note the lack of windows. And, last I remember, it looks like this: https://vinylhub.discogs.com/shop/235626-missing-records by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 6:06pm)

There's different possibilities depending on when you visited. It'd also help if you could narrow down at all where it was, even roughly. Edit: I see you've worked out which it was. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 6:11pm)

Do you understand how translation works? You don't provide the gist of the conversation to the translator and ask them to write the conversation for you. You've basically asked this sub to write part of your story for you. The least you could do is give us the actual conversation, if this isn't it. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 6:18pm)

So, again, you are asking us to write the conversation for you. Not translate an existing one. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 6:23pm)

What part of my comment are you not getting? When you give someone "the beats of the conversation" (ie. the gist), rather than the *actual conversation*, you are asking them to write the conversation for you. We are perfectly capable of understanding American English. Write it in a way that is natural for American English and then you'll have a better chance of getting something. Otherwise people are going to "translate" the pish you wrote as you wrote it. I'm also not seeing how this weird interaction could be relevant to a story about Ralph Danks. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 6:32pm)

Can I ask why you need have one of the women in this conversation to be an uberbitch? If she's meant to be an alternative type that hangs out in record shops, she's probably not the kind of person who calls a random woman a munter. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 8:56pm)

I think you have a weird sense of what "sassy" means. And wtf is "playful hostility"? Neither of these characters are believable as actual adult women. Deciding that a presumably artsy looking album cover that doesn't show the artist's face means that the artist is ugly? That's not "sassy", nor is it playful, that's just plain nasty. Immediately jumping to presuming that the artist in question has gotten up herself? It lacks any kind of nuance. It's lazy, kinda shite writing. If you intend for this character to be present in the story any further, especially if you ever want people to like her, you've created a fucking horrendous first impression. If you want to get across that this person is resentful of people who've gotten out of Glasgow, then you don't need to make her be horrible. Drop the "she must be ugly" shite. It's juvenile and makes it sound like you're about 14 years old with no idea how adult women act. The last bit - "has it gone to her head?" - chuck that. Make her scoff and comment about how she doubts the artist has stuck around this shitehole. You can easily get across "this person wishes she could get out of Glasgow and is mildly resentful of those who have" without making her a crab in a bucket. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 9:13pm)

As someone who is very fond of snark, as I'm sure you have guessed - calling other women ugly literally out of absolutely nowhere is not "snark". It's being a massive boot. If you want this character to be completely unlikeable, then go ahead I guess. > You only need look at album covers of female artists. Their looks are usually the selling point. It’s obvious. I don't think you've spent a lot of time looking at the album covers of the types of female artists that release their music on vinyl and thus get sold in record shops like Missing Records. I also think you haven't listened to very many female artists in general if you think their selling point is their looks and not basically anything else... big /r/menwritingwomen vibes here mate. > “of course, she got out of this shithole.” She must be on a beach in Malibu. What would she be doing here? Your American thought patterns are showing again. You seriously don't know Glaswegians if you think this woman would go onto a stupid rant like that. She certainly wouldn't say fucking Malibu. Malibu is not where comes to mind to Glaswegians if we're thinking about a nice place with a beach. Malibu is irrelevant to us because we're not American. You are. She would stop at "I'm sure she got out of this shithole". This is why Americans need to stop writing Glaswegians. And *especially* Glaswegian women. Because christ you cannae do it. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 9:31pm)

Why did you bother asking Glaswegians if you don't want assistance from an actual Glaswegian woman in making your Glaswegian women sound realistic? You sound like an insufferable wee boy, frankly. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 9:45pm)

You've put an awfully broad spin on a specific statement I made mate. Only "stuff" that they have first hand knowledge of? Depends entirely on the specific stuff being referred to, surely? I don't need to literally be able to do magic to write a story about using magic. I don't have to be an elf to write a story about an elf. I don't have to have lived in a castle to write a story about living in a castle. But if the story being written is very much based in real life - real places, real accents, and real dialects - then it does seem prudent to me to familiarise yourself with the places, accents, and dialects you're including in your writing. Feels like the respectful thing to do. And with the magic of the internet, there's lots of options for how you could do this. I can't imagine it'd be hard to find audio and transcriptions of Glaswegians speaking - in fact, I'm sure the sub would have suggestions if the OP wanted them. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 10:15pm)

> But buying music in a Glasgow record shop is fair game. Don't be obtuse. That is quite clearly not just what OP is writing about. They are attempting to write a conversation between two Glaswegian people (the fact that it's in a record store is incidental and isn't actually the focus of the conversation) and trying to make it sound natural and distinctly Glaswegian. Which will be pretty hard if they are entirely unfamiliar with the accent and dialect, don't you think? by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Dec 2021 10:29pm)

Has she checked into the various NDR reliefs? by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Dec 2021 6:36pm)

As a "gamer"/"geek" who fucking hates most "gamer/geek aesthetic", I am *dying* for somewhere that isn't like the cesspits that the average "gamer" location is. I'm a woman and I like to think I'm reasonably decent looking - certainly not stereotypical for a "gamer" type - and fuck me, I hate some "gamer" places. Either creepiness or gatekeeping, fake gamer girl shite. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Dec 2021 6:35pm)

Yeah, trying to find a DnD group online has been a nightmare. Found a promising group - the premise of the campaign seemed interesting and compatible with a character I'd come up with, the DM was experienced and seemed nice, etc. But one player decided he was gonna "test my knowledge" of DnD. Already shite behaviour in my opinion - it definitely wasn't an effort to determine how much support I'd need from the group, he was so clearly dying for an AHA, I caught you out! moment since he was dismissive of me from the moment I joined the Discord. But it was particularly irritating since this was after I'd had a chat with the DM and he had evidently decided I knew enough that he wouldn't need to explain the basics to me. So I noped out. Found another, and the DM wanted to introduce my character to the on-going campaign by making her a damsel in distress, captured and raped by bandits and he wanted to the group to find said bandits mid-attack. He was very insistent on that. He thought I wasn't very committed to roleplaying games when I said no thanks... The first DM didn't really get why I had an issue with the guy grilling me on DnD. The second guy was just entirely oblivious to why it was weird he wanted me to roleplay getting raped over voice chat with a group of 5 random men I'm just speaking to for the first time, even after I explained myself to him. I also got told I don't look like I play DnD over and over, with varying levels of accusatory undertones... Then they wonder why "women don't play DnD". We just don't play DnD with them hah. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Dec 2021 6:56pm)

On the off chance she hasn't, encourage her to do so. If the property's RV is below is £15k and she's got no other rateable properties, she'd pay no NDR at all, and if it's under £35k, she'd get a 25% discount. And definitely for 20/21 and 21/22, she'd get RHLA which is 100% relief. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Dec 2021 7:58pm)

No problem! Ping me a message if she has any questions - I'm very familiar with the NDR reliefs system and eligibility so I'm happy to help if I can. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Dec 2021 8:15pm)

They're profitable because it's cheap ice cream sold for a huge mark up and the vans aren't exactly expensive to get your hands on and kit out. I'm quite sure at least some of them will be a front - perhaps for seling drugs out of the van, but money laundering would be a strong contender. Not for any really big operation generating dirty cash, unless they were operating a fleet of ice cream vans alongside other "legitimate businesses". But I've never personally seen an ice cream van that takes card. It's a cash-based business and it's very normal for them to not bother generating receipts of any kind on actual transactions, so if they happen to introduce a bunch of cash income they don't have receipts for, that won't really be an immediate cause for concern. How do you prove it *wasn't* from the van selling ice cream, after all? It's kinda like how tanning salons used to crop up everywhere - a lot of them were fronts for money laundering. My own tiny wee village had something like 4 on the main street, 3 of which were owned by the same family. All of them exclusively took cash. All of them had a couple of branded cars. As to being easy for police to track - ehh. Depends. Given that I expect the dodgy ones to be on the money laundering side of things rather than actual drug dealing, your standard police aren't really taking anything to do with money laundering. Those are really complex cases conducted by specialists and can take years to reach a point where the evidence is strong enough to do anything. It's difficult to prove. Plus it'll be interlinked with other investigations into the actual activity that generates the dirty money in the first place and it's all a matter of which case reaches a point that it'll stick enough to send them to prison. Kinda like how it was well known that Al Capone was involved in gang activities, but the thing they got him on was tax fraud. by dddiamonddd (Mon 13th Dec 2021 1:44pm)

Dessert shops, vape shops, and American Candy shops are the ones I suspect. by dddiamonddd (Mon 13th Dec 2021 4:44pm)

> even harder than heroin addiction By what measure? Giving up heroin can kill you. Giving up nicotine will make you irritable. by dddiamonddd (Fri 17th Dec 2021 3:31pm)

I wouldn't leave myself with 20 minutes even if I felt I was 110% certain the bus would run precisely on time. by dddiamonddd (Fri 24th Dec 2021 3:34pm)

> If I can hear it, it's too loud. That is going to be very dependent on what the soundproofing is like between the flats. Also, how much can you actually hear? Low level clearly-there's-music-on, or can you hear every single word of the lyrics? Because if it's the former, you just need to suck it up tbh. It's just part of living in close proximity to people. by dddiamonddd (Mon 17th Jan 2022 11:27am)

> You can reclaim 20% VAT on any puchases you make once you hit £85000 in sales. You can reclaim VAT on any purchases at any sales level. It just requires being VAT-registered. The threshold is just about when you become obligated to become VAT-registered. by dddiamonddd (Wed 19th Jan 2022 10:47am)

Nah, you choose a primarily cash business. Something with stock can work just fine, it just has some disadvantages over services. by dddiamonddd (Wed 19th Jan 2022 10:46am)

The town I live in has a butcher. I understand that what he sells is of good quality, but I went in to price it up. The meat was 2-3 times what I could buy it for in the Tesco down the road. Now, you can obviously argue that it's possible that extra quality is worthwhile - it's probably not injected with water, the chickens might well have been raised somewhat more humanely, etc. etc. But it's still 2-3x the price. My town has some patches of quite well off people, but a lot of deprived areas too. If that Tesco goes, I don't think Bob Smith is going to see much in the way of new footfall because I don't think that many people can realistically afford to pay those prices. In my case, I reckon I could swing it, but I'd rather just try to go completely veggie/vegan. But I doubt that driving more people towards giving up meat completely would be the intention of splitting supermarkets back up to being butchers, grocers, etc. again. by dddiamonddd (Wed 19th Jan 2022 10:55am)

Depends what you mean by "fake". Fake what? The movement of stock? Not that difficult. And sure, the suppliers to American Candy and pals is almost certainly someone who knows what they're up to. People are saying American Candy is likely VAT fraud and it will probably have that too, but there's a reason why (at least the last I looked) they often don't take card at all. I'm an auditor. Not for HMRC, but I can tell you that HMRC are stretched in terms of their capacity for auditing the tax position of companies and are focused on heavy hitters, the ones where they think big errors and dodgy accounting is likely. The types of companies that get used for this stuff aren't usually particularly big and the tax inputs and outputs are relatively low. Audits are bloody expensive to do. Money laundering is far better caught by the police than HMRC and the police don't catch them out via audits. by dddiamonddd (Wed 19th Jan 2022 11:37am)

Yeah I honestly think there needs to be system-wide shake ups to make it possible. Tesco (which I'm using as a stand in for all supermarkets) gets business because it's cheap - substantially cheaper than many of the alternatives. People need to minimise their spending on food because all of their other costs are relatively static and high. There's a lower limit on how cheap rent and council tax can possibly be and the closer you get to that lower limit, the more trade-offs there are. Gas & electricity was, before now, relatively fixed, but now that's sky-rocketing. Incomes are pretty much static, but they're low for many. Until people have a lot more disposable income in their hands, we're never going to see people move away from Tesco. They just can't afford to. So all these wonderful little shops out there that use local produce and work to reduce their environmental impact, as fantastic an idea as they are, are inaccessible to many. Their clientele will be restricted to the well-off (and you can see that in where they set up shop...) until some major changes happen. by dddiamonddd (Wed 19th Jan 2022 12:09pm)

Social care for a council typically covers care homes, residential schools and homes for disabled people, foster homes, etc. Which one of those do you propose gets gutted first? Shall we let a legion of grannies just sit in their own filth because the budgets got cut and we can't pay for care home staff? Or what about some disabled kids, how about we stop replacing their toys? This is the eternal problem with councils. They can't win. by dddiamonddd (Wed 26th Jan 2022 5:33pm)

I'm an auditor. Not of Glasgow City Council, but of other big councils. Every single council, GCC included, are making an absolute stink behind closed doors about the funding. I get that it feels better to assume they're doing nothing, but there's a limit to what they can do and everything I have access to as a local government auditor suggests that it's being done. by dddiamonddd (Wed 26th Jan 2022 5:31pm)

They are. All councils are making a stink about it. by dddiamonddd (Wed 26th Jan 2022 5:35pm)

Well, aren't you a shining example of what I mean when I say that people don't really understand what councils do and what's going on in government in general when they stamp their feet about the problems with GCC (or any council): https://consult.gov.scot/health-and-social-care/a-national-care-service-for-scotland/ They are already planning on centralising social care services. They have been talking about this for a while and it's now finished the consultation stage. The fact is that this is going to take some time to implement. The short-term solution to the degradation of other services provided by councils is not to cap or cut the budget for social care. Social care is already very strained as it is. by dddiamonddd (Thu 27th Jan 2022 9:25am)

> there needs to be a line drawn on how much money that dept gets "a line drawn". That's a cap. Do you know what happens when put put a hard cap on a budget? Inflation, over time, creates a cut. The monetary value will stay the same, but the buying power of that number drops. You've still got £Xm but over time, that £Xm pays for less. Thus, it is a cut to the budget. £Ym allocated to care home staff got you, say, 1,500 care home staff. But after a couple of years £Ym only gets you 1,400 care home staff, with increases in minimum wage, general upwards pressure on the salary expectations of potential staff, etc. You might not have *explicitly* reduced the budgeted number, but you did. Because that number buys less and less over time. What is a cut if not a reduction in the services that can be provided? This is what nurses mean when they talk about how they've "taken a pay cut in real terms". Their pay has not risen anywhere close to being in line with inflation. So they're being paid broadly similar to what they were in previous years, but the cost of rent, food, gas & electricity, etc. etc. have all increased, and so they cannot afford to pay for as much as they did a few years ago. by dddiamonddd (Thu 27th Jan 2022 9:37am)

So you didn't click the link I gave you, did you? by dddiamonddd (Thu 27th Jan 2022 6:52pm)

I worked for them on John Lewis (way back in like 2011) and they were shitehawks then too. by dddiamonddd (Wed 2nd Feb 2022 1:44pm)

My gym has functionally given up on it. Like 2-3 people other than me when there's about 50+ people in at the same time. But the supermarket has generally been mostly people wearing masks. So it seems to be dependent on where you are. by dddiamonddd (Mon 7th Feb 2022 1:10pm)

Putting an air freshener over a strong bad smell only serves to emphasise the bad smell. People who drown themselves in perfume/aftershave/body spray in my gym need to learn this. by dddiamonddd (Sat 19th Feb 2022 1:20pm)

It was Whole Foods. by dddiamonddd (Sun 27th Feb 2022 9:51pm)

Americans aren't kidding when they call it Whole Paycheck. by dddiamonddd (Sun 27th Feb 2022 9:50pm)

has anyone ever actually paid for one of those mugs? I have two but I got them just in an order for other stuff, certainly never asked nor paid for them. by dddiamonddd (Sat 5th Mar 2022 7:35pm)

It does get abused though. I don't think that's an argument for getting rid of it by any means, but it was pretty grim after I participated in a big discussion about sexual assault in this very sub and I got bombarded with Reddit's "help" (I didn't, at any point, express any sort of intention to hurt myself or anything, just to be clear), along with abusive messages tell me to kill myself. so... I'd be surprised if anything more than a small percentage of the messages sent actually go to someone who might be helped by them. by dddiamonddd (Tue 8th Mar 2022 9:19am)

You'd be scraping. I lived alone in Dennistoun on £17.5k but that was also over 5 years ago now. by dddiamonddd (Tue 15th Mar 2022 10:36am)

Yeah I was £500 a month for a one bed when I was there (5 years ago). It was a very nice one bed, to be fair. I also lived in a two bed on Meadowpark Street which was £550 (in 2012). Just went and had a nosey at what it'd cost for a two bed there now and found one that is smaller in all ways than the flat I was in and it's £1,015 a month! What the fucking shit. by dddiamonddd (Tue 15th Mar 2022 11:17am)

ooooooooooft that's really grim. I really liked living in Dennistoun for the access to the city centre, but at current prices, not a chance will I go back. None of the flats I can see are even any better than what they were like 5-6 years ago either. Seems people weren't kidding when they were saying it was going to be "the new West End". House scalpers all around. by dddiamonddd (Tue 15th Mar 2022 11:45am)

Snap Fitness is long gone. It closed in April 2020. by dddiamonddd (Fri 1st Apr 2022 1:53pm)

How would your housecats manage to move in to another person's house if they were housecats? Housecats don't go outside to learn of the existence of anyone else's house. If your housecats got outside by accident, I wouldn't be betting on them having moved in with someone else, put it that way. by dddiamonddd (Tue 12th Apr 2022 3:02pm)

Some people call their cats "house cats" but let them out sometimes, which means they're not house cats. Not sure the relevance of them having a house v a flat when talking about how they managed to lose 3 cats. by dddiamonddd (Tue 12th Apr 2022 5:48pm)

A desire path is, generally, a short cut. The Wikipedia definition is: > A desire path (also known as a desire line, social trail, goat track or bootleg trail) can be a path created as a consequence of foot or bicycle traffic. The path usually represents the shortest or most easily navigated route between an origin and destination. The width of the path and its erosion are indicators of the amount of use the path receives. **Desire paths emerge as shortcuts** where constructed ways take a circuitous route, or have gaps, or are lacking entirely. by dddiamonddd (Wed 27th Apr 2022 1:50pm)

There's reasonably strong evidence to suggest that most illness we experience is due to lifestyle choices and behaviours. I bet you've had some illnesses or injuries in your life that we could say you only had because of your own choices. If you go for a run tomorrow and break your ankle, sorry mate, no help for you, that's just a potential side effect of going for a run. Out for a drive and get into a car accident? Sorry mate, you'll have to bandage yourself up, that's just a potential side effect of your choice to drive. I'm being a bit facetious, but only a bit here. To kid on that addiction isn't typically preceded by other factors like mental health problems and chronic pain is to be incredibly disingenuous. Nobody starts taking heroin because they're really happy in their life. Drugs are a lot easier to access and provides relief faster compared to trying to access mental health support through the NHS. Have you watched the TV show Dopesick? While it's about the US's struggles with opiates, it's relevant here too. Opiates, heroin included, are painkillers and they are addictive. A common avenue into opiate use is pain - injuries that don't quite heal, or being put on opiates by your GP, then taken back off them without support to taper down (this is why GPs don't offer opiates anywhere near as much anymore), or chronic pain conditions for which the painkillers you get from your GP just aren't cutting it. Acting like the issue of addiction is solely one of choice, in absence of all other possible influences and factors that feed into how someone ends up with that choice and why they might make it, is incredibly unfair and unempathetic to the people who struggle with it. by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd May 2022 1:37pm)

Anecdotes are not data. by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd May 2022 1:41pm)

Those programs are designed to put the people with addictions in contact with support systems that can help them and, while doing so, reduce their exposure to the type of social situations that create barriers to getting over an addiction. A person who is addicted to heroin getting their heroin from a nurse with a sterile needle, in a clean environment, will be less likely to overdose, less likely to end up with any infections from a dirty needle, so just from that perspective *alone*, it is better than shouldering the cost of dealing with an overdose or an infection if one happens. by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd May 2022 1:40pm)

DELETED Is it actually in the way? Because if it's not, I don't see why it'd be a nuisance. by dddiamonddd (Fri 6th May 2022 8:11am)

Is this for your own use? by dddiamonddd (Sat 7th May 2022 9:40pm)

Only if they REALLY want your specific bike. The principle of locking up your bike is to make your bike annoying to steal. If it looks like it's going to be a pain to steal, they'll steal someone else's bike that's easier to steal. If you have a bike that is highly desirable by itself, then you need to take extra measures. OP's bikes are not highly desirable by the looks of it. So this was an opportunist, not a targeted theft. by dddiamonddd (Tue 10th May 2022 1:05pm)

Are you new to Glasgow or something? by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 12:49pm)

I see they think this isn't worthy of condemnation to the same degree as when Rangers did it because at least they didn't break any memorial benches. Because that's the bar now, I suppose. Didn't break any benches, who cares about all the other shite left in their wake. by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 12:46pm)

Because it's disgusting that anyone felt like it was fine to make it like this in the first place? I don't actually care how quickly it gets cleaned up - it's the fact that it happens in the first place. We shouldn't be sitting here going "oh well at least it was cleaned up quickly". Normal people don't leave the places they live looking like this to begin with. This is scumbag behaviour. by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 12:52pm)

I'm not sure if you're implying I'm treating it as a point scoring exercise, implying one team is better or worse than the other, or what, so just to be clear - I think football culture in Scotland is a fucking stain, no matter which specific team and their arsehole fans is causing the problem, and makes me want to die of embarassment when I see this type of thing. So if you were coming at me with this comment assuming anything else, you can get that idea swiftly out of your head. by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 1:03pm)

Seems there's a lot of short memories cutting about these days. Lots of Celtic fans were rushing to say Celtic fans would never make a mess of the city and yet here we are. Seems the fans of each team just want to define themselves against the other team. Whatever that team does that's bad, we'd never do that. Whatever that team is 'for', we're against. It's exhausting. by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 2:16pm)

Or how about you fuck off? I literally don't care. Anyone who cuts about the streets acting like any of these folk did is a twat. Littering is cunty behaviour. by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 4:53pm)

Are you a touchy Celtic fan or something? You're doing a lot of greetin about being compared to Rangers fans. by dddiamonddd (Sun 15th May 2022 6:16pm)

If you like the Marvel cinematic universe, St Abbs on the east cost was used to film the New Asgard scenes. It's about 2 hours from Glasgow. It's a really nice area! by dddiamonddd (Mon 23rd May 2022 8:39pm)

I would argue that that makes it an experience in and of itself. by dddiamonddd (Mon 23rd May 2022 8:35pm)

That was Marx, not Benn, who defined the working class that way. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 9:13am)

It'll depend entirely on who you read! If you read Marx, he viewed he called the "smaller capitalists" if I remember rightly, and they were people like shopkeepers (your corner shop shopkeepers sort of folks) and artisans who work for themselves. From a Marxist perspective, he would say that those folks are all the working class because they aren't literally capitalists. But, certainly, people in those types of jobs tend to not view themselves as working class. I'm an accountant and I honestly think that view is a big reason why there is no union for people in my job. Because most people who do my job (auditor in a Big 4 firm) have aspirations of climbing in the corporate ladder, being upper/senior management, and, to be blunt, are often coming from privileged backgrounds to begin with. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 9:13am)

Porsche too. Porsche basically make you jump through hoops to buy because they don't want to sell to someone who doesn't fit the brand. If they're even willing to have a conversation with you, you'll know if you come across as someone higher up the class hierarchy than working class. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 9:17am)

I don't think you understand too much about how it works at the C-level suite if you think a change of CEO means the previous one was "fired" in the same way you or I could be fired. The CEO can certainly be removed, but I promise you that it is not a "firing" in the same way at all. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 9:14am)

https://www.scotland.police.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/disclosure-log/2021/february/21-0127-memo-recording-filming-taking-photographs-etc-of-officers-on-duty/ To quote the Memo in the above link, which is a memo from the Chief Superintendent of Professional Standards at Police Scotland: > Generally speaking, officers have no powers to stop members of the public filming or taking photographs of them in the course of executing their duties in public places i.e. where the member of the public has a legal right to be. > Notwithstanding the foregoing, if it is considered that the filming is impeding or obstructing an officer in the lawful execution of their duties the individual may be committing an offence under Section 90(2) of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 or potentially a Breach of the Peace. The decision on whether such an offence is being committed will depend on the particular nature of the incident officers are responding to and the manner in which the filming is being carried out. > However, once an image has been recorded, the police have no power to delete or confiscate it. This, of course, does not affect an officer’s powers to seize items where they suspect there is evidence of criminality. I haven't done a very extensive search, but I can't find anything to suggest that this does not continue to apply. But obviously a solicitor would be better equipped than I am. From what you have posted: 1. You were in a public place where you have a right to be. They are in a public place. It is not illegal to take photos or video in a public place. 2. You are not impeding them or obstructing them from carrying out their duties - they have, evidently, been able to arrest the intended person and you did nothing to prevent them from doing so. Everything would have presumably occurred exactly as pictured whether or not you were filming (up until the point where you were challenged on filming, of course). 3. The manner in which you were filming doesn't, in my non-lawyer view, seem to amount to any breach of the peace. You're just standing there, filming. 4. As noted, they have no right to delete it. They'd really struggle to argue there was evidence of criminality here so they'd have no right to seize your phone for filming. Raise a complaint to Police Scotland. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 10:36am)

I posted this on your other post, but I'm going to post it here too: https://www.scotland.police.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/disclosure-log/2021/february/21-0127-memo-recording-filming-taking-photographs-etc-of-officers-on-duty/ To quote the Memo in the above link, which is a memo from the Chief Superintendent of Professional Standards at Police Scotland: > Generally speaking, officers have no powers to stop members of the public filming or taking photographs of them in the course of executing their duties in public places i.e. where the member of the public has a legal right to be. > Notwithstanding the foregoing, if it is considered that the filming is impeding or obstructing an officer in the lawful execution of their duties the individual may be committing an offence under Section 90(2) of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 or potentially a Breach of the Peace. The decision on whether such an offence is being committed will depend on the particular nature of the incident officers are responding to and the manner in which the filming is being carried out. > However, once an image has been recorded, the police have no power to delete or confiscate it. This, of course, does not affect an officer’s powers to seize items where they suspect there is evidence of criminality. I haven't done a very extensive search, but I can't find anything to suggest that this does not continue to apply. But obviously a solicitor would be better equipped than I am. From what you have posted: 1. You were in a public place where you have a right to be. They are in a public place. It is not illegal to take photos or video in a public place. 2. You are not impeding them or obstructing them from carrying out their duties - they have, evidently, been able to arrest the intended person and you did nothing to prevent them from doing so. Everything would have presumably occurred exactly as pictured whether or not you were filming (up until the point where you were challenged on filming, of course). 3. The manner in which you were filming doesn't, in my non-lawyer view, seem to amount to any breach of the peace. You're just standing there, filming. 4. As noted, they have no right to delete it. They'd really struggle to argue there was evidence of criminality here so they'd have no right to seize your phone for filming. Raise a complaint to Police Scotland. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 10:52am)

There is absolutely no obligation to inform anyone that you're filming in a public place. It is certainly considered polite, but there's no requirement to do it for anyone, not even police. https://www.scotland.police.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/disclosure-log/2021/february/21-0127-memo-recording-filming-taking-photographs-etc-of-officers-on-duty/ The UK doesn't guarantee a right to privacy from images of you being taken in a public place. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 10:55am)

I don't see what the relevance is of that. If that is indeed woman who phoned the police, then the police would speak with her separately. OP isn't preventing them from speaking to her. They are fine to inform her that she is being recorded, so if she doesn't want what she says to be recorded, then she is aware that she shouldn't speak. OP had no obligation to stop filming. It is perfectly legal to film in a public place and the law places absolutely no obligation on any member of the public to inform anyone that they are filming. It's certainly considered polite to notify people that you're filming, if it's not blatantly obvious, but not illegal to not inform people. > I don't know what specific law it would be, but I do know that the police do have a right to move you on in such instances as you are disrupting them. In this case, OP is not disrupting them. They are carrying out their duties, presumably lawfully, and OP has done absolutely nothing to prevent it. Police certainly can ask people to move on, but when it is a public place, they don't have unilateral powers to actually force people to move on from a public place unless the person is actually disrupting their duties (which starts to become potentially a crime, like breach of the peace). Which OP was not doing. So they can ask OP to stop filming and they can ask OP to move on, but OP was in a public place that they have every right to be in. OP isn't, say, trying to cross a police cordon or anything of the sort. Or trying to stay in a private location where they have no right to be. They are just standing in a public place filming, completely legally. > Whether or not that extends to seizing the phone itself, I don't know. Did you read the linked memo? It would not extend to seizing the phone itself. They could only seize if they have a reasonable suspicion of criminality, and, as I said, they would be extremely hard pressed to argue that OP, a random member of the public who is (as far as we can tell) not involved in whatever incident incited the arrest, declining to move from a public place constitutes criminality. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 11:03am)

OP has posted the video which shows the beginning of the interaction. They were standing filming the police, as they are allowed to do. https://www.scotland.police.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/disclosure-log/2021/february/21-0127-memo-recording-filming-taking-photographs-etc-of-officers-on-duty/ by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 11:20am)

> I am not a lawyer. But this isn't true and the memo doesn't say this. The memo literally says: > This, of course, does not affect an officer’s powers to seize items where they suspect there is evidence of criminality. Which is what I'm referring to? They can only seize if they suspect there's evidence of criminality. They can't just take people's phones unilaterally. And I'm not talking about data protection either? What grounds do you think the officer here has for seizing OP's phone? Because he doesn't articulate one in the video. >The memo does touch on that filming police can come under obstruction under the right context. I.E: A victim or witness may not feel comfortable giving testimony if they are being recorded. The reasons for this are fairly self-evident. I don't disagree. But merely filming the way OP does doesn't rise to that. If, say, the police and the woman in question tried to move away from OP to speak because she didn't want to be recorded and OP kept following them, then you can certainly argue that could become disruptive. As it stands, OP stood in the same position, the officer and the woman approached OP (well, the woman approached the officer, but by doing so essentially also approached OP), not the other way around. They would only be recorded speaking because they moved close enough to the recording device to be recorded. The remedy to that is to move away from it because there is nothing that legally prevents OP from recording. If OP does not allow them to remedy that, then you start getting into questionable territory. But not as things are presented here. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 11:41am)

With that username, I'm not wholly convinced you can be calling anyone a roaster. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 11:51am)

I actually find the "beer" and "boobs" part of your username weirder than the football part, but anyway. If the police did take his phone, they're potentially acting outwith their powers. It's in the interest of everyone that the police operate in line with the established protocols for how they should behave and what they can and can't do. Whether you personally think OP is a roaster should have no bearing on whether the police conduct themselves in line with how they are supposed to when interacting with OP. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 12:09pm)

Good for you. I'm sure you're adamant that you'll never ever have an interaction with the police, because innocent folk never ever interact with the police, right? So who cares if they act outside of their powers when they interact with people. Suspected criminals, no matter how weak the basis for suspicion, don't deserve proper treatment under the law! Aye? by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 12:38pm)

>My contention is with your use of the word only. The memo is a rule of thumb regarding recording police in public, it does not touch on the myriad of nuanced instances that could take place. I don't really understand the contention. Because what you've said fundamentally agrees with me. There are plenty of instances where it could take place, but I don't think you're trying to suggest any of them lack a suspicion of criminality? Are you suggesting police can just take someone's property if they feel like it? Because I don't think you are. > As for what you're saying regarding the officer should make an effort to move away from the scene / the person filming... all I'll say is your mileage may vary. Which means what, exactly? > The person filming already approached the scene and made the decision to start recording The scene is taking place in a public place, where any member of the public has a right to be. Are you suggesting the public can't choose to be near the police when they're carrying out their duties? Because I don't think you are. > whether or not it becomes obstructive isn't based on the behaviour of the individual but the effect the individual is having. Sure, but what effect is OP having in the video prior to the officer approaching? They're just standing filming. The police only react to OP as they get closer to him and notice that he's filming. It's not like it's uncommon for people to watch the police as they're arresting someone - they are well used to having an audience. So, I think it's resonable to assume OP didn't do anything other than approach and stand in the spot they're in immediately before filming began, otherwise I'd expect the video to open with an interaction that was clearly in the middle of occuring (which is what the previous video that was posted was, but this video now shows us what was going on immediately before the police approached OP). OP isn't saying anything, OP isn't standing in their way, or even particularly close to them, it is not inherently disruptive to the police for someone to be nearby, observing, when they're carrying out their duties. It's not inherently disruptive for someone to film the police from a distance either. If we start saying "being near the police is disruptive", that feels like questionable ground, does it not? > Maybe the officer was abusing his power or maybe the officer had a good reason for it Which I don't hear the officer articulate in either video. Sure, we don't have the full thing, but what I've heard, what I've seen, and what that memo says is that the police officer is acting outwith their powers. They can ask, but they can't legally compel OP to stop filming unless OP commits another crime in the course of filming. > it seemed like the woman wanted to point out something to him (maybe another suspect involved in the crime). I mean, I could say it seems like she wanted to tell the officer he looked great in his uniform. We don't know what she was going to say. Speculating that it was something very important to the situation is just speculation and utterly pointless. It doesn't matter what she was going to say in the slightest. She was informed by the officer that OP was filming, she didn't speak. We don't know if she didn't speak because OP was filming, or if it was because the officer continued to speak to OP, but OP didn't actively prevent her from speaking or moving away to speak to the police. A single instance of someone not wanting to speak in that exact moment because they were being filmed doesn't constitute a crime on the part of the person recording, does it? Not by any law I can find. If she moves away and OP follows, yeah, sure, that could be construed as disruptive. But not unless there's active action on OP's part. Which filming is not. > Either way, there was a gap between both videos and it's not clear exactly what's going on or has happened in any of it. Sure, there's a gap, but it doesn't seem like a massive gap and I wholly believe we're seeing the start of the interaction in this video. The start of the interaction is pretty relevant. by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 12:36pm)

The police didn't, as far as I can gather, actually seize OP's phone (from reading all of the OP's comments - OP, can you confirm? /u/Interesting_Trust_47 because it sounds like the police deleted the video and left, but didn't realise it was backed up). Because I would wager that they knew fine well that there was no criminality nor evidence on the phone. It seems like it was a bully tactic. > the phone can and will be seized Can be seized? Sure. WILL be seized? Given that there's four officers present and close enough to the arrested person to hear anything they may have said, I see no reason why the police would seize the phone of an uninvolved party in this situation to act as evidence about the arrest at the time of the arrest. If there were an accusation, say, about police conduct, they wouldn't necessarily need to seize the phone unless the owner of the phone wasn't willing to provide the evidence. Which, if the police approached OP and said that they had received a complaint about police conduct during this arrest, I feel like OP would provide the video. Do the police routinely hear a reply to the caution/charge and start looking around for someone who might have caught that on camera to evidence it? by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 1:18pm)

>This is getting a bit out of hand for my liking. I'm not a fan of long paragraphs / debates. Well, I am? And when you're disputing what I'm saying, I'm going to reply. If replying properly requires a paragraph, I'll use a paragraph. From what OP has said, the police haven't actually seized his phone. The title of the first video included this: > he said we might not need to seize your phone if you delete the video so he went on my phone and deleted the video Which reads to me like the officer said they could seize OP's phone, but then backtracked, and positioned it as them doing OP a favour, like we won't seize your phone if you let me delete the video. Presumably because they realised they would have a shakey basis for seizing the phone. Because the police have no right to compel OP to delete it either. If the police believed that they should have the video (whether it be evidence of criminality on the part of OP, of someone else, or anything like that), then they wouldn't tell OP to delete it, right? by dddiamonddd (Tue 24th May 2022 1:23pm)

Silverburn is no longer 24 hours either - shuts at midnight now. Annoying. by dddiamonddd (Thu 26th May 2022 11:46am)

When inflation is higher than what your pay rise is, you are functionally getting a pay cut. To demonstrate: Let's say your weekly shop has been £100 for the past while. And let's kid on it's exactly the same stuff every time. If inflation is 9%, then what cost you £100 to buy before now costs £109. If you don't get any sort of pay rise, then your £100 now buys you 91% of what you could buy before. Thus, your buying power has decreased. The same amount of money gets you less stuff than it did before. In order to maintain your buying power, your increase in pay must at least match inflation, so your budget can similarly scale up, so you can continue to buy the same stuff as you did before. If your pay rise does not meet inflation, then you are effectively taking a pay cut, as you can now buy less than what you did before, which will have a knock on effect to your quality of life. They were offered like 2%. Which is way below inflation, whatever measure you use to track it. So they're asking ScotRail drivers to continue to work outwith their contracts (by working near-enough required overtime and on their days off) for less pay. That's shite. by dddiamonddd (Fri 27th May 2022 11:09am)

>Point being that logic reads as everyone else has had a pay cut. So train drivers should also take a pay cut? Is that the logic? > My argument and it’s my opinion - is that other areas should be seeing rises from the public purse way before a train driver. I think other roles are underpaid, worse conditions, etc. And how does train drivers taking a 'real' pay cut help with that? > The argument might be that everyone should get a rise. But if we are honest & realistic - that won’t happen. It’ll be first come first served or who has most power. Do you know where power comes from? Often, unionising. If train drivers get what they're asking for, don't you think that will prove to people the benefit of striking or other industrial action? > I think what has been speculated is - if a pay rise was to occur across the board - the result will be that way inflation will rise as a result and we will be back to square one. If you have an extremely basic understanding of how inflation works. This has been speculated by people who only kinda know how inflation comes about, but not much about how an economy as a whole functions. People do not go out and buy more basics when they get a pay rise. Nobody's buying 20 litres of milk because they're feeling flush. But they sure as shit buy fewer basics when they're having to choose which necessity they'll spend their limited funds on. Giving people a pay rise will allow them to continue to be able to actually buy the things they need, because few people are out buying significant amounts of shit they don't need right now. To say "oh if we give people a pay rise, inflation will happen!" is short-sighted. Because not giving people a pay rise means people will starve. And when winter comes, they will freeze in their homes. > The logical and what I believe the likely outcome will be that some will get and some won’t. Creating or resulting in a rise - but not as steep. So those that don’t get will likely remain worse off. Yeah, no shit it's unlikely everyone gets a pay rise. This is capitalism, isn't it? > Collectively maybe we should look to advocate for those worst off first. So, please explain to me why you think ScotRail drivers choosing not to advocate for themselves will help the worst off? by dddiamonddd (Fri 27th May 2022 11:59am)

>I think if they get a rise. That limits opportunities and funds for others getting a rise. Do you think there is an unlimited amount of funds to go around? I think you misunderstand the governance and financial structure under which Scottish Rail Holdings has been set up to operate ScotRail and how public sector entities and their finances operate in general. Which is fine, most people don't. I only do because I audit the finances of a bunch of public sector entities (and companies). There isn't "unlimited money", and I didn't say that, but there's certainly not no money. And considering the drivers are one of the absolute key members of personnel, in a job with a high barrier to entry that cannot be very quickly replaced (which is exactly why we have an issue now - they have been relying on those drivers working well beyond what their contracts say), it would be, to be blunt, fucking absurd to risk losing any goodwill those drivers have. ScotRail cannot operate without the drivers, full stop. > I think if unionising helped every profession or job in the same way - you would find that the pay for many jobs wouldn’t be so low. I think some have very strong unions & some do not. I don’t think that’s train drivers fault. But I do think that gaining sympathy and support from others can be difficult when they do not have access to the same support you do. The answer of: unionise, strike, etc. doesn’t actually solve the problem. I would say that the majority of people are in support of the train drivers here. Look at the replies to posts that ScotRail make about it, where they try to blame the drivers. Lots of people quite publicly calling them out on their weasel words. I am in a profession that is NOT even a little bit unionised. There is no union who represents me. At all. That's a situation that exists for some complicated reasons that I won't bother getting into here, but that's the situation. I can't strike. I can't do anything really except make sure I fully understand my own rights and be a one woman union for my own good. But I'm not so bloody petty as to resent others for having that representation and power. > I mean a wider society strike or industrial action would be a greater resolve for the issue. Sure. I am very pro general strikes. The problem is organising them. Since they're extremely difficult to get people to buy into, then it's not unreasonable for individual professions to carry out industrial action individually, rather than waiting for something that is quite unlikely. > I think you come across as hostile. If money goes up on all wages, that’s assuming all businesses, organisations, etc have the funds available to do this. I think we can agree that isn’t the case and isn’t the basis for capitalism. I think some can afford more than other or some can’t. In order to pay more they charge more? So - that’s the argument for inflation? I think you come across as a little ignorant of how businesses operate. I'm an accountant. If everyone understood how the financial side of the world worked as well as I did, nobody would need me. What do you think you're actually saying here? Because I'm genuinely not sure. I strongly believe that any business that cannot afford to pay its workers a living wage deserves to fail. I literally could not care less if a business goes under because their success relies on underpaying their staff. To be clear, I am a socialist. I am of the opinion that an individual's ability to survive and thrive should not be at the whim of whether an employer wants to pay them enough to allow them to. Capitalism relies on a latent threat of destitution to keep people willing to work for poverty wages. It's just a given. It's why capitalism doesn't like unions - unions force them to pay more than poverty wages. > So if not everyone is to get a pay rise, shouldn’t it go to those most underpaid or most needy? Do you feel train drivers represent the most needy? Again, what do you think you are asking here? There are lots of chronically underpaid jobs out there. Scottish Rail Holdings is not in a position to top up the pay of, say, nurses, or carers, or cleaners, or retail workers, or whoever else. SRH can only do anything with the pay of the people they employ. And if you're about to point out that they are a public body, I'd like to refer you back to the fact that you fundamentally don't understand how SRH (and public sector bodies in general) is set up to operate if you think that SRH has anything to do with the pay of any other public sector employees. > I think instead of individual action it requires collective action as a society. Cool. Agreed. Away and get started on organising that then instead of moaning that train drivers are overpaid and shouldn't be taking any action on their own working conditions. > I think what happens when individual industries take action and collectively resolve an issue for themselves. I think they are happy and problem solved. That’s the end of it. As previously stated. What I think will then happen is they will have them taken a money that could be better spent elsewhere and there won’t be support for others as their issue is now resolved. Again with the not understanding how SRH operates. You're talking about individual industries who end up happy with their lot. But you also seem to think that people are going to take collective, society-wide action? Which is it mate? If every individual industry was unionised, it wouldn't really matter if there was collective action or just loads of individual actions. by dddiamonddd (Fri 27th May 2022 12:42pm)

I started to type out a reply to this, but I don't think you realise how much of my time you are asking for here. As I started to answer yor questions, I realised that everything I said required explanations of even more concepts, of background knowledge I couldn't reasonably assume that an average person would have, and I would absolutely have hit the character limit before I'd meaningfully answer those questions. The tl;dr is that these sorts of organisations are generally run, as much as possible, to be self-sustaining. Government funding is common, because these entities are considered necessary for a functioning society. That funding often has conditions attached, eg. it must be used for a specific purpose and returned if it's not used for that. My job involves checking those conditions were adhered to. I'd bet that the Scottish Government is going to be more inclined to provide funding for ScotRail, given that it's very important for the economy and it'll form a major part of their push to met environmental targets. How much that funding will be, how necessary it'll be in the first place (since that likely depends on what sort of surplus/deficit arises from normal operation), who knows. Running a company that operates a service with the intention of making a profit (a la Abellio) is a different beast from running a public sector entity that exists to provide a necessary serivce. If it can be operated in such a way that it doesn't require government funding to meet its objectives, then there wouldn't be a need to fund it. That's probably not likely, but the entirety of its funding won't be coming from the government either unless they decide trains are free to use. To explain how public sector entities operate in more detail is to basically explain everything I've learned over the course of years of auditing their financial statements in detail, with increasing levels of responsibility for those audits, and a CA qualification. With a shitload of nuance. And I can't put this on my timesheet. If it took me a few years to fully understand their operation, the associated legislation and regulations, etc. I am not going to be able to properly explain this to you in a reddit comment. I can only suggest you look up some public sector entites and read their financial statements, and then read the legislation that'll be referenced in them. There's a lot of publicly available information on the Scottish Government website about the funding they provide to public sector entities too, both the specific funding and their approach with allocating funding. I think the most recent Parliament budget would have had information about ScotRail (I didn't look too much into it because I only looked for what might impact my specific clients). by dddiamonddd (Fri 27th May 2022 3:22pm)

The article says "rescue" and it says: > He was then assessed by the Scottish Ambulance Service. and later in the article: > “He has been recovered with the assistance of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and passed into the care of the Scottish Ambulance Service.” There would be nothing to assess and nobody to pass into the care of the ambulance service if they had died. Someone just jumped off a bridge near me. The articles about it and the statement from the police did not say that person was passed into the care of the ambulance service, despite that happening (the police arrived, did CPR, the ambulances arrived and took over) because that person died on the scene after about an hour of constant CPR. If they died on the scene, they would say so. If they were taken to hospital by the ambulance crew but were declared dead there, they would say so. by dddiamonddd (Thu 2nd Jun 2022 1:06pm)

Here is how the same paper reported a suicide that occurred last night (and it WAS a suicide, that I am 100% certain of): https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/20183813.woman-tragically-dies-police-called-barrhead-train-station/ > A 57-year-old woman, from Barrhead, was pronounced dead at the scene. > Police say the death is not being treated as suspicious and a report is being sent to the procurator fiscal. This is how they report suicides. They don't say suicide, but they say it is not suspicious. If this person died, they would say. by dddiamonddd (Thu 2nd Jun 2022 3:19pm)

Maybe you're one of the buskers that every other busker thinks is a wanker for hogging the good spots. (this is a joke) by dddiamonddd (Sun 5th Jun 2022 1:40pm)

It's £1,820 for a year of a full-time undergraduate course! by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Jun 2022 7:03pm)

What you're referring to is the funded places. Full details of their funding can be seen here: [https://www.sfc.ac.uk/publications-statistics/announcements/2021/SFCAN202021.aspx](https://www.sfc.ac.uk/publications-statistics/announcements/2021/SFCAN202021.aspx) I can only speak for the universities I've audited, but they do always aim to hit the funded places numbers because if they don't, it can affect their other funding. The SFC funds a LOT of stuff, like capital maintenance and all that. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Jun 2022 7:13pm)

They are, to be eligible for a lot of the SFC funding they receive. There's details about the sorts of funding they get via the SFC here: [https://www.sfc.ac.uk/funding/university-funding/university-funding.aspx](https://www.sfc.ac.uk/funding/university-funding/university-funding.aspx) The Outcome Agreements (basically the agreement of what their metrics are) and the final funding allocation can be seen here: [https://www.sfc.ac.uk/funding/outcome-agreements/outcome-agreements.aspx](https://www.sfc.ac.uk/funding/outcome-agreements/outcome-agreements.aspx) The SFC funds a lot of stuff, like capital maintenance and research. It makes up a really big chunk of what education establishments actually get. I haven't sat and calculated it myself, but for anywhere but the prestigous unis, I'd say it would be hard to make up for that SFC funding with international students. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Jun 2022 7:10pm)

Depending on what you graduated in from Strathy, Strathy might hold more weight. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Jun 2022 7:15pm)

Who pays big fees? The unis? You don't understand the first thing about university finances then. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Jun 2022 7:15pm)

Smile and nod politely. If they ask me anything about myself, I tell them I'm an accountant and if they dare ask, I bore them with an in-depth explanation of how auditing the financial statements of a public sector entity works. I find the concept of "Value For Money" audits to be particularly off-putting. by dddiamonddd (Tue 7th Jun 2022 10:56am)

House prices have climbed substantially. My landlord let me know last time I saw him he was getting a surveyor out so he could remortgage onto a better LTV rate. There'd be no need to revalue the place to bump up the rent, so it'd be a silly reason to get a surveyor out. They just can't bump up the rent outside of what market value would be for your place. To check market value, you want to look for properties nearby of a similar spec (bedrooms, furnished/unfurnished, size, quality, etc). Get screenshots/archive the pages showing the equivalent properties. If any rent increase is significantly different from that, then you can dispute it with a tribunal. by dddiamonddd (Tue 7th Jun 2022 5:16pm)

I came to say Cafe Cossachok, on behalf of my Russian colleague who loves it, but I'm getting conflicting messages from Google about whether it's actually still open or not and I haven't been in the city centre for ages to look... by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jun 2022 3:36pm)

Looks like I need to put a lot more effort into working out how to recreate the breadstick things they sold then! I'm really sad to learn that it's gone :( by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jun 2022 4:32pm)

Yep! I could have eaten nothing but that bread and have been 100% content, but the food in general was just great. I miss it so much. I've got rye flour lurking in the kitchen, so I really should get on to experimenting. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Jun 2022 6:14pm)

In particular, a bar of chocolate that literally includes an ingredient that helps make sick taste and smell like sick (butyric acid). by dddiamonddd (Wed 22nd Jun 2022 8:13am)

Amazing, thank you! by dddiamonddd (Sat 25th Jun 2022 11:27am)

How old are you? by dddiamonddd (Sat 2nd Jul 2022 1:28pm)

Same. Could only get out of the church services if you were EXPLICITLY another religion. Just atheist wasn't enough, even with my mum (who was also atheist) saying she was fine for me to not go to them. Still had to go. by dddiamonddd (Sat 2nd Jul 2022 1:27pm)

If the 1994 is anything to go by, I was in school at the same time as you and my primary + secondary school were both religious-y despite being non-denominational and continued to be at least until my little sister left school in 2015. by dddiamonddd (Sat 2nd Jul 2022 2:30pm)

Costco is selling 600 2000IU vitamin D supplements for less than a fiver. The RDA is 600IU for adults as far as I know. A big portion of it is obviously knowing that you should supplement it, but it isn't terribly expensive. I'd imagine what the NHS could get it for would be lower still and would probably see some returns on it from better wellbeing and health. Plus, a higher dose taken somewhat irregularly is likely still going to have some impact. The RDA of vitamins don't need to be hit bang on every day for you to see the benefits of them. by dddiamonddd (Mon 4th Jul 2022 2:15pm)

It's only £20 p/m usually for a single gym. It was closer to £26 last I looked at PureGym for multi-gym. by dddiamonddd (Wed 6th Jul 2022 8:46pm)

If you're on Facebook, there's groups called Brilliant Bartering, with one for each area. Given that it's Silverburn, you could get away with joining the Glasgow, East Renfrewshire, and Renfrewshire/Inverclyde ones provided you're willing to collect. You can post ISO (in search of) posts in there asking for what you want and people will often have stuff that you can take for either no barter at all, or in return for a bottle of prosecco or some snacks, something like that. by dddiamonddd (Tue 12th Jul 2022 11:21am)

Definitely seconding the recommendation for Sony's ANC headphones. I had the WH-1000XM2s and now have the M4s and they're incredible. ANC definitely takes some getting used to for anyone who is new to it though - it felt like the sort of pressure in my ears you get on an airplane at first. by dddiamonddd (Mon 25th Jul 2022 1:26pm)

Mind that you won't remember the cyclists that follow all of the rules. Just like how you only remember the twat in a (insert German car brand here) that cut you off on your commute and not the hundreds of other cars you saw as you drove. by dddiamonddd (Mon 1st Aug 2022 9:57pm)

I would very much hope it would be illegal for that to be the case. by dddiamonddd (Tue 2nd Aug 2022 10:59am)

Certain jobs get higher multipliers too. When I qualify, I could get a 5.5x multiplier for my salary because I'll be a qualified accountant. Same goes for lawyers, architects, that sort of thing. by dddiamonddd (Wed 3rd Aug 2022 10:46pm)

DELETED Do you not think that line of thought is a bit weird? As a person who has, at varying times, likely been described as "heavier", I'd be mortified to know you're looking at me thinking "good for her". It feels a wee bit patronising, even though I know you're not thinking it with any sort of ill intention. I'm genuinely not trying to be mean here or anything, it's just that these comments aren't as reassuring to many as you might think it is (I'm sure someone will come along and say "actually I really like this!" and that's good for them but they aren't everyone). Especially because when someone expresses embarrassment or nerves about being in the gym, people say "nobody's paying attention!" and comments like yours contradict that. by dddiamonddd (Fri 5th Aug 2022 7:12pm)

PureGym in Silverburn is usually quiet in the morning (pre-8am). Fully appreciate that that might be a bit far out though. by dddiamonddd (Fri 5th Aug 2022 7:10pm)

Which people should do. Because people who laugh at other folk in the gym and make people who are just trying to get a workout in feel unwelcome are irredeemable cunts and should be banned. by dddiamonddd (Fri 5th Aug 2022 7:15pm)

oh noooo people like different things and spend their money differently from you. how terrible. by dddiamonddd (Sat 6th Aug 2022 2:33pm)

No, they get NDR relief if it's unoccupied. https://www.mygov.scot/non-domestic-rates-relief/reliefs-for-empty-or-newly-re-occupied-properties Most will get relief of at least 10%. by dddiamonddd (Sun 7th Aug 2022 11:48am)

They do. It's just that anti-social behaviour is a massive, complicated issue and council budgets are limited. To solve anti-social behaviour, to some degree, you're basically saying you need to solve poverty and create better economic and social prospects for young people. It's a massive battle against, basically, how they were raised, the friends and family that surround them. The people who cut about doing graffiti are not teenagers sitting with an unconditional uni offer and great job prospects - they've left school the minute they possibly could, which means they've disengaged with one of the primary ways a council can interact with them. If they redirected all of the graffiti removal money towards this, it might put a dent in it, but then people would inevitably kick off about the graffiti because that money won't be enough to stop it. by dddiamonddd (Sun 7th Aug 2022 12:07pm)

Pushing people out of the places they live in by making it unaffordable is not a good thing. All you do is move the poverty and the problems associated with it around, as well as just turning places into a middle class haven. The people being pushed out by the rising house prices need to go somewhere and council house provision is poor, private renting is expensive if you want to be anywhere semi-decent or accessible, and the new houses getting built are all expensive. People working £20k jobs (of which there are tonnes in Glasgow) can't afford to buy a £200k+ flat, can they? Especially if they have kids and so need more than 1 or 2 bedrooms. I got pushed out of Dennistoun by rising rents as it started to become "the new West End". I moved to another area that was, at the time, generally regarded as a shithole and got warned against it. Now that area is getting better, and there's loads of new houses! Except not a single one is selling for below £225k every time I look. And those are usually wee 2 bed terraced houses. If it wasn't for the fact that my own income has increased, I'd be facing the prospect of getting pushed out of here too. It is good when an area gets better, but it is absolutely not good when said area only gets better because you turfed out poorer people. You just concentrate poverty in some other area. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, so to speak. Instead, should we not aim for a rising tide that lifts all boats sort of scenario? by dddiamonddd (Sun 7th Aug 2022 12:25pm)

Way to misrepresent what was said mate. Nobody is saying they want people to stay poor. They're saying gentrification mostly just moves poor people around and doesn't meaningfully impact their lives when suddenly they can't afford to live where they are now. The former residents of Govanhill aren't all still there, enjoying the fruits of gentrification. Some are, I'm sure, but plenty won't be. Is improving the lives of that small portion worth displacing the rest? Just to move the problems Govanhill had to somewhere else? by dddiamonddd (Sun 7th Aug 2022 12:33pm)

This is some word salad. by dddiamonddd (Sun 7th Aug 2022 7:13pm)

What point do you think you're making here? Because it's not as compelling a point as you think it is. Are cans of spray paint particularly expensive? Are they difficult to find or obtain? Especially if you're someone who isn't against shoplifting? There's a reason why you tend to find the spray paint isn't anywhere near the door in an art supply shop. If you think poverty means "literally no money at all", then you have a very poor understanding of what being in poverty means for an individual. Having a bit of disposable income doesn't mean that someone isn't in poverty. Poverty has thresholds that are set at a monetary value but also a 'quality of life' consideration. You can have enough money to rent some shitty horrible flat owned by a slumlord that does nothing about the mushrooms growing in your walls in a horrible area with some money leftover, but your overall income isn't enough to get out of said area and live somewhere that's safe and well maintained. That is poverty, just as much as "literally no money leftover" can also be poverty. Don't act like "they manage to get a hold of spray paint" indicates that poverty isn't a factor in anti social behaviour please. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th Aug 2022 10:14am)

Did I say that I think it is a factor in *every* instance? You're kidding yourself on if you think it's not a major contributing factor. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th Aug 2022 1:26pm)

You can say cunt on the internet, you know. Especially in this subreddit. Away back to your redpill subreddits, whining about how you can't get a date because you're a twat. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th Aug 2022 4:26pm)

I'm a public sector auditor so I genuinely know that I know more about how a council's finances and budgeting processes work than the vast majority of people do. You're oversimplifying it to an incredible degree. You're acting like *nothing* except the nominal budget has changed since then. by dddiamonddd (Wed 10th Aug 2022 5:02pm)

You obviously don't know what a public sector auditor does then. I nitpick the fuck out of the public sector body's financial management. They don't like me. Because we do have a go at them if their budgeting is shite, or if they don't achieve ["Value for Money"](https://www.nao.org.uk/successful-commissioning/general-principles/value-for-money/assessing-value-for-money/) which is a specific thing we audit. I literally do not work in or for the public sector. I work for a private accounting firm. I have absolutely no reason to be a "sycophant" for them. I just happen to have more knowledge than you do and you're spouting utter shite. by dddiamonddd (Thu 11th Aug 2022 5:55pm)

Nae reasoning with cunts like you, I guess. by dddiamonddd (Thu 11th Aug 2022 11:13pm)

The bit where I didn't try to compare you to a Nazi sympathiser. Listen kiddo, it's okay to not understand how things work. It's fine to admit maybe sometimes you're a little out of your depth. Like when you talk about how councils work. Don't worry, it took me a few years of auditing them before I could fully get my head around it. Just maybe don't cut about talking like an expert on stuff you literally don't know the basics about. If you hate Glasgow this much, literally just fuck off. You don't make it any better with this shitey attitude. But I'm guessing mummy and daddy won't move just because you demand it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 11th Aug 2022 11:16pm)

Yet again proving that you don't know what an auditor is. This is fucking cringey. I am an external auditor. I'll say it again so maybe you understand this - I do not work for any council. I audit councils. I am not internal audit. Also note that I never said *which* council(s) I audit, otherwise I'd be doxxing myself since it is public information which firms audit which councils. Anyway. It is my job, as part of an independent team, to check that the published financial and some non-financial information isn't an absolute pack of lies. I have *literally no say in how any council spends their money* because the money is spent by the time I arrive. I confirm they've collected and recognised their income correctly, properly recognised expenditure, that the expenditure actually happened, that their governance isn't dogshit... If you want to criticise councils, fine, but start by actually understanding what you're talking about. Every council in Scotland publishes their financial statements publicly. You can read the audit results reports for every public sector body through Audit Scotland, where their auditors provide opinions on value for money, governance, financial management, etc. We don't get paid by Audit Scotland based on whether we give an unqualified opinion - we're paid regardless of our opinion so we have fuck all incentive to lie about our findings. Because we're an independent third party. You can read the minutes of every meeting of every board in every council, minus some limited private sessions that are private for good reasons. by dddiamonddd (Fri 12th Aug 2022 12:01am)

Did you know that 100% of people exposed to dihydrogen monoxide will die within days of their last exposure to it? Somebody call the scientific journals. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th Aug 2022 8:54am)

> Just saying, my partner and I have never gotten under 200 for utilities By utilities, you mean gas & electricity? And do you mean before the current crisis? Because if so, unless you're living in a big house, either you are massively underestimating your usage, or there's a problem. What size of property are you living in? Until gas & electricity prices went ballistic, I was paying £68 a month for my one bed tenement flat and I definitely had the heating on more than just enough to not freeze, while using a PC practically all day and a TV + games console. Have you checked whether your meter keeps ticking up even when absolutely everything is off? by dddiamonddd (Thu 18th Aug 2022 9:20pm)

> Im in the process of trying to consolidate my debts into one. Genuinely, what's the point? You've said you have £700 disposable income each month. 3-4 months and you could have that completely gone. Consolidating that is a bit of a waste of time. Yeah, you'd save a bit of interest, but I'm willing to get it's not very much by nominal value. > I might even just pay £300 the first few months You have £700 disposable income. Why would you only pay £300? Have a few months where you don't splash as much cash and the debt is away. £300 means you'll be 7+ months to get rid of it. Consolidating it just to take longer to pay it off is wildly inefficient and, frankly, not indicative of good financial habits. The reason I know this is that I consolidated my own debt (more than 10 times your debt) many moons ago and didn't then properly dial in my habits to make sure I could get it all cleared off and the 0% offers I'd managed to get it on to expired with the balance not having changed very much. You don't need consolidation, you need the discipline to pay off as much as possible as soon as possible. > I also want to explore watys of improving my credit score. I'm going to just link to the /r/UKPersonalFinance subreddit's guide to credit ratings for you to read as that explains it better than I ever could: https://ukpersonal.finance/credit-ratings/ > I know i wont be accepted for a credit card etc due to horrific credit card spending early 20s to get through uni living Things like missed payments and other poor history will drop off after 6 years when the account in question is closed. Here is MoneySavingExpert's guide to credit builders: https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/credit-cards/bad-credit-credit-cards/ The local credit unions don't offer anything like this. They offer loans (which you likely won't get if your credit report is as poor as you say it is). Use the eligibility checker to see if you can get any of those credit cards, then *only spend on the credit card what you would have otherwise spent* and pay it in full and on time every single month. by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 7:18am)

> I had read/misread somewhere that it is better to pay them off slowly than wipe them straight away Total myth. Yes, credit history is important, but building history by slowing down repayment of high debt costs far too much to be worthwhile. You're far better building history by doing something like the credit builders in that MSE link. There is no reason whatsoever to build history via something that costs money. A credit builder card is functionally free provided you only use it for normal spending and pay it off in full. Don't pay interest in the hope of "building history". > the reason for the consolidation is some have been sold so many times I receive letters from multiple companies about the same debt and im worried I pay X company only for Y company to say they own it. If you're in the position that your debts are with debt collectors, this is, to be blunt, a really bad situation. I'd strongly suggest speaking to StepChange: https://www.stepchange.org/ This also makes the terrible idea of "paying off slowly" an even worse idea. Paying down debts that are with debt collectors slowly just extends the pain far beyond what it should be. You need to be absolutely clear on what your debt is and who it is with. Which would mean contacting anyone who has sent you a letter and asking them to provide evidence of the debt. It is REALLY important that you are careful in your wording. In Scotland, debts are considered 'prescribed' after 5 years - https://www.moneyadvicescotland.org.uk/faqs/prescription-of-a-debt - IF, and only if, you haven't acknowledged that you owe the debt and no court action has been taken. As such, you need to basically write back to them and ask them to provide you with evidence that the debt is actually owed by you and that they have the right to collect on it. But you need to write it in such a way that you are specifically saying you do not claim the debt nor are you agreeing that you have liability for the debt. StepChange can help you get all of this straight. Use your credit reports from the different agencies to track where the debt started. eg. if you had an overdraft with ABC Bank that has gone to a debt collector, then you would expect that the debt collector would provide evidence showing that overdraft with ABC Bank being sold to them. You can also contact the original lender and see if they have any records to tell you where the debt went. Sometimes, if the debt has shuffled around between collectors, you might find they don't really have any evidence. If they can't prove you owe it, then they're unlikely to ever be able to take court action. If court action has been taken and a CCJ raised against you, you MUST deal with that. There's no getting out of a CCJ. The fact that it is with debt collectors means that the chances of you consolidating the debts with another lending product are basically zero. No lender beyond scummy payday lenders will touch you right now. So your options are pretty much to just establish what the debts are, who they are with, and paying them off, then waiting. Time is one of the best healers for your credit history. In short, gather up everything you know about all of your debts and speak to StepChange. They will also help you make a budget. Be ruthless and be ready to cut your spending down. What you've described is, functionally, an emergency and you should treat it as such. Your credit history will not improve whatsoever until you get the debt collectors off your back, so don't even bother looking at credit building products. They're a total waste of time for you right now. by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 9:42am)

No problem! With your salary, as much as I'm saying it's an emergency, it's also a comparatively really small value. It's an emergency in the sense that you should laser focus on getting shot of the debt ASAP, but don't get overly stressed about it either. £2k in debt is not going to sink you unless you let it. So get a realistic plan in place and you could easily be home free by the end of the year if you buckle down. I think 4 months of being a cheap bastard and spending as little as possible will be worth it. Don't be wildly unrealistic here though. Don't sacrifice sanity and give up every single hobby you have. Just be ruthless in deciding what's worthwhile and what isn't. Have a read at places like /r/UKPersonalFinance and /r/UKFrugal for ideas on how to reduce your spending. You'll be fine! by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 10:18am)

Not a sir! But you're welcome. > begin saving to buy a property Good idea. > (which seems like a total pipe dream as I watch my salary deflate with inflation with each news article) You're on an above-average salary. Based on the typical 4-4.5x multipliers on salary for buying, you could borrow about £148-167k. More than enough to get you a property in plenty of places in and around Glasgow. Won't be a mansion, but it wouldn't be a hovel either. So, for addressing a) savings. First step, save money as an emergency fund. At least a couple of thousand to cover unexpected expenses and whatever else might happen. It'll help you avoid getting into debt again. Secondly, if you have never owned property before and therefore would be a first-time buyer, get a LISA. A LISA has a contribution limit of £4k per tax year, but you get 25% added in by the government. Only put money into the LISA that you don't need access to because there is a penalty to withdraw it. That turns your 4k into 5k to put towards a deposit on a property. I personally save up for the LISA contribution in a normal savings account so that it's accessible for as long as possible then I deposit it into the LISA in March, before the tax year ends. Remember to save for other stuff like solicitors fees and all that jazz. They can't be paid from a LISA, so you need to save separately for those. /r/HousingUK can help with some indications of how much you should need for those. As to how much of a deposit you need, at an absolute minimum, 5% of the property value. The key is that 'asking price' is NOT the same as 'property value'. The bank does a valuation and decides how much they're willing to lend. If the seller wants no less than £150k asking but the bank says it's only worth £140k, then the bank would only lend the difference between your deposit and the £140k, not the full £150k. A good guide is the home report value, which is generally what banks will value it at. If you're paying over home report, you need to fund that yourself because a mortgage lender will not fund it. In that imaginary scenario, the bank would want a minimum 5% deposit, so 5% of £140k, £7k, and they would lend you the other £135k. You would need to make up the £10k by yourself to get to £150k. It's likely that going forward, given the likely recession and all that, that 5% mortgages are going to be harder to find, so 10% is probably more realistic. Look at Rightmove and other sites like that to get an idea of what houses are going for, but be aware that by the time you've got a deposit saved, the market is likely to be different. But it can't hurt to get a vague idea. > I foolishly missed out on that government scheme which matches your deposit or something to that effect. I assume you were thinking about HTB ISAs here, which are what the LISA replaced. For b), a decent credit score is a function of time and history. The good thing about mortgages is that they are secured lending. Secured lending is lower risk for the lender because if you don't pay, they have an asset (the house) that they can just take back and sell to recoup the debt. Credit cards, personal loans, etc are all unsecured lending. Which means that if you don't pay, the lender might just have to eat the debt because they have nothing they can take from you. What this means for people with poor credit is that the bar for getting a mortgage at all is lower. It doesn't mean that they'll give a mortgage to just anyone, and poor credit might mean the rate you get approved for is higher. Interest rates on debt is one of the ways lenders manage their risk - if they consider you a higher risk, they want higher rewards for lending to you. > I'd mentioned one of the credit builder cards but didn't seem to keen on them Not sure what you mean here. Prepaid credit cards aren't that helpful. You need one that reports to the credit reference agencies. A normal credit-builder card from somewhere like Vanquis, Aqua, Capital One, etc is, functionally, a normal credit card. They just usually have lower limits and higher interest rates. Get one, do normal spending on it, do not spend any more than you would have spent if you were using your debit card, pay it off in full. Rinse, repeat, every month. My partner has one set up to just have Netflix on it. Netflix charges it every month, the direct debit clears it off every month. This builds up a consistent history of having and using credit responsibly. But frankly, the most important thing you can do right now is to not get into anymore debt. You don't NEED to have a credit card to get a mortgage. by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 11:16am)

> I had seen ones which acted like a credit card, but were actally your own money, but you essentially just get less for your £1. This comes back to my earlier point about not paying to improve your credit. Even if it's a small fee, that's still not worth it just to build credit history. > The reason I thought of maybe doing that as in the meantime im not likely to get any sort of credit card (nor do I want one), just thinking of ways to make some positive movements on my credit score. The credit builder cards are very deliberately low limits and high APRs, so I wouldn't write off your ability to get one just yet. MSE has eligibility checkers that will tell you what you can get. But if you can't get approved for one right now, I wouldn't go paying fees to get the prepaid ones. Once you've got this £2k of debt out from under you, you'll immediately start seeing improvements from that alone and it shouldn't be long before you can be approved for one. You're talking about a minimum of 3 years before you'll have savings to buy, so it's not something to go rushing into and pay fees to have. Get one when you can get one, but definitely don't stress. The mortgage lender is primarily looking for assurance that you won't stop paying them and not having any credit for a few years isn't a problem. People get mortgages without ever having had a credit card or anything all the time. > I probably should have understoood that Eh, nobody knows something until they learn it and now you know. > I'd set myself a target of probably 3-5 years to save up to allow me the money for deposit, the potential upset of the additional charges like you mention can crop up and some scope for the other charges. Ideally i'd like to be going into this process with £20,000, which im basing on the expectation of my salary increasing over the next two years as well. Sounds like a very reasonable plan to me. > There's a lot in terms of rewiring my approach to money involved here as well, as I, and this is just being honest to myself, has historically been very poor so im trying to really change my entire view on money, budgeting etc. I've been there, and I can tell you that it will click for you eventually and you'll be fine. I'd definitely recommend a way of budgeting called "zero-based budgeting". A traditional budget has you go "I think I'll get this much money in and I'll spend this much money". And then at the end of the month, you compare the budget with your actual spend and you go "aw fuck, I spent more, what a shame, better luck next month". Fine if you've got loads of wiggle room in your budget, less fine if you have specific goals. Zero-based budgeting is also known as "envelope" budgeting. You take the money you *actually* have and you divide it up into "envelopes". You put £X into your Rent envelope, £Y into your food envelope, £Z into your discretionary spending envelope, and so on until you run out of money. If you want to spend more than is in a particular envelope, you MUST take that money from another envelope. This type of budgeting slaps you in the face if you're impeding on your ability to pay your bills or save, because you have to take money from somewhere else. You could do it with actual envelopes, but you can also recreate it with any bank account that allows you to have pots (Monzo comes to mind but there's definitely others) or using specific budgeting software like /r/YNAB. I found that thinking about my money this way absolutely changed my approach to money. Suddenly debt pretty much wasn't an option anymore. It emphasises that *something has gotta give* if you're going to overspend and forces that to be a conscious choice. You need to go and take money away from your savings right now if you want to spend more than your budgeted fun money this month. However you do it though, as long as you're totally honest with yourself throughout, you'll be fine. Definitely make sure you give yourself room to have fun money though. I've tried to go down to absolutely no discretionary spending whatsoever and it's grim once the novelty wears off. Even just £100 you can spend however you like is helpful. by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 12:15pm)

It's not as if the folk who empty the bins are the ones sitting updating that list though. by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 2:20pm)

It hasn't actually gone bankrupt yet, the news is just saying that they're apparently preparing to do so, and bankruptcy doesn't mean that it's shutting immediately. It'll likely keep operating for a while and might not shut at all, depending on how bankruptcy proceedings go. by dddiamonddd (Fri 19th Aug 2022 10:26pm)

Definitely do it! £200 a month (pre-crisis) for a two bed flat is madness. Since it's a flat, it's possible your gas and electricity supply is supplying more than just your flat. Not unheard of for folk to find out their meter is ticking up with their neighbour's usage too. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Aug 2022 1:10am)

> I literally do just end up lifting rom the the other pot when I max one out. Ultimately, this is fine to do, provided you do it knowingly and understanding what that means for your other goals. But if you do find yourself making the same move over and over, it may be worthwhile reassessing how much you're giving yourself in each pot. In an ideal world, you could be like "okay £100 only for fun money for this month" and that'd be it, but you need to be realistic. And you need to be quite firm with yourself about taking money from other pots. Work out why that happens - do you blow the budget early in the month? If so, what on? Can you avoid/minimise that? What's the driver behind it? Is there any correlation between you doing one thing and then going over your budget? For me, it was going out for a couple of drinks with friends during the day, not getting drunk or anything, but just tipsy enough that I didn't want to cook what I'd already bought in once I got home, so I'd get a takeaway. It takes a lot of self-reflection, but it's worth it. > Thinking back to that can be quite depressing. I just looked at the graphs I have of my debt. In April 2019, I had £29k of debt and I was earning £17.5k at the time. That £29k, aside from the portion that was my car (which was only £5k, I needed it for work), came from being an absolute fucking dipshit between 2012 to, approximately, 2017. I got my shit together in 2017 and stopped the debt from growing, but I wasn't earning enough to actually get it to meaningfully come down. I sometimes I do get genuinely raging at myself, at the thought of all the shite I bought. I have very little to show for that debt (except my wee car, that I paid off in full earlier this year!). The clothes, shoes, make-up, etc is all gone now because it's absolutely not my style anymore. Some of my furniture contributed, but not much - it's only IKEA stuff, nothing fancy! So the rest of it was, basically, takeaways, drinks, other disposable/temporary things. But there's nothing I can do to change that now. I was a dipshit and that's just the reality of it. I've been on an apprenticeship since 2018 and I'm about to qualify as an accountant later this year, so I'll be hopefully getting to £40k, and what's left of my debt will be gone shortly after that. It pisses me off to think that if I'd been saving instead of paying down that debt, I could have already been in a house, but it is what it is. Gotta just keep going forward. You'll be okay. by dddiamonddd (Sat 20th Aug 2022 1:02pm)

Pretty much. There also seemed to be a difference if the rider was perceived as a woman (eg long hair and a skirt) - they'd get slightly more clearance, if I remember rightly. And children also got plenty of clearance. Seems to be the "they'll be fine if I hit them" thought process (subconscious or not), but people are apparently a bit less inclined to put a woman or a child at risk. Not massively so, so it's not like any study showed that men were getting side swiped and women weren't. It was only a difference of a few inches, maybe 3-4 inches in the average passing distance. But when people say they "hate cyclists", the image they usually get in their head is the Middle Aged Man In Lycra or a Deliveroo rider now, not a woman or a kid, generally. I used to cycle when I lived closer to the city centre and when people talked about hating cyclists, I'd say I was a cyclist and they'd *always* go "oh I don't mean like you". Because I'm not a middle aged man in lycra or a Deliveroo rider. So I can see why seeing a "MAMIL" might make people a bit less inclined to drive safely around them. by dddiamonddd (Mon 22nd Aug 2022 9:00am)

There's no other door visible into that building on Google Maps except the back door and there's no direct access from the pavement. I can only guess they share a front door with the building next door. I used to live there (not that specific building, but in another building in that 'triangle', on Bannatyne Avenue, and it's a completely closed in courtyard behind there. by dddiamonddd (Thu 25th Aug 2022 1:32pm)

My guess would be static! Maybe his clothes rubbing off a pipe or something? by dddiamonddd (Sat 27th Aug 2022 9:50pm)

It doesn't matter what the average rent is, what matters is the rent of comparable properties. So this can take into account bedrooms, size, furnished/unfurnished, the condition of the interior, amenities (parking, security, that sort of thing) etc. The average just includes everything. You're better looking at Rightmove to see what a flat of similar size and condition goes for. by dddiamonddd (Sat 27th Aug 2022 10:52pm)

They were there first. You're the kind of twat that gets great venues shut down because you move beside them and then cannot believe it when the venue continues to operate *exactly the same as it always has*. Move house if you don't like living near a pub. Get some earplugs. Get a grip? by dddiamonddd (Tue 13th Sep 2022 5:22pm)

Ahhh pishy Wishy. Whether they'll try again might be a question of how desirable the moped is and how bold they're feeling. The fact that you were up and shouting at them means they might not try again. All you can do is make it as annoying as possible to steal so that they go and try to steal something else. Make it noisy, bright lights, a strong lock, etc. If you can close the moped in (maybe back up a car very close to it or something?) so that they have practically no room to get into it with tools, that might help. Or is there any potential for moving it into your back garden? Not sure if you're terraced or not and if that'd be a massive hassle. by dddiamonddd (Sun 2nd Oct 2022 8:21am)

Eat food, buy stuff, get recipes, see what charities are up to. by dddiamonddd (Sat 8th Oct 2022 10:29am)

Is this a shite attempt at satire? Because it sounds like you're saying that we're doing animals a favour when we deliberately give them a shite life and then kill them to liberate them from the life we gave them. But you don't sound like you're advocating for *maybe not giving the animal the shite life in the first place*? by dddiamonddd (Sat 8th Oct 2022 3:23pm)

I'd add Barrhead to this. Barrhead station which will get you to Central in no more than 25 mins if you get the slow train + plenty of buses to Paisley if need be + buses into the city that are fairly direct. by dddiamonddd (Sun 9th Oct 2022 12:52pm)

When I went to the gym in Silverburn, there'd be people waiting outside JD Sports in there most days at a similar time. by dddiamonddd (Tue 11th Oct 2022 10:42am)

I see someone has a complex. by dddiamonddd (Sat 15th Oct 2022 6:18pm)

Seems like this particular brand of twat is suggesting that OP should "suffer" because the company that built the building do poor quality work (in the view of other people who build things) and this somehow means OP deserves this. by dddiamonddd (Sat 15th Oct 2022 6:18pm)

Octopus deducted mine off of my direct debit. Some providers are doing it as a refund though. They take the full DD and then send you the £66 back to you. Maybe that's what Scottish Power are doing? by dddiamonddd (Thu 20th Oct 2022 9:19am)

I sort of view time as a person moving forwards. So if you're facing in the direction you're moving (clockwise), then it's at your back, not your front, so "the back of X". eg. If 3 is a person facing clockwise, the back of 3 is just before 3. But I tend to get around this by just never ever using the phrase myself and specifying what time I mean, and the few people I know who routinely say it, I assume they could mean basically any time somewhere either side of the time specified. And worst case I make them specify a time, if they want me to be there by "the back of 3". So I'll say "I'll just aim to get there at 3" and let them correct me if that's too late for them. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Nov 2022 10:27am)

If I can make a suggestion, unless you're looking for some very specific features that you only get on gaming mice (thinking along the lines of number pads under your thumb like an MMO mouse) or you particularly like the "gaming" aesthetic, I'd genuinely recommend looking outside of "gaming mice". I've got a Logitech Mx Master 3 and it's 4k DPI if I remember rightly. I much prefer it to any Razer mouse I've had over the years. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Nov 2022 12:39pm)

True - I'm more of an MMO/RPG player so the weight doesn't cause me any issues. My twitch shooter days are long gone haha. by dddiamonddd (Thu 10th Nov 2022 3:38pm)

Who operates it? Because a lot of these types of places are run by charities on contracts (sometimes loss-making) on behalf of the council. The three times daily checks makes it sound like it's one of them. by dddiamonddd (Mon 14th Nov 2022 9:48pm)

Is it Bob McTaggart House on Dunblane Street? If so, that's run by a charity - https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=SC008277 this one specifically. So it's not being run for anyone's profit. They were in a deficit overall for 2020/21 and only a slight surplus in 19/20. 21/22 financial statements aren't available, but knowing what I know about the care sector as a financial auditor (I don't audit Talbot, but I do audit a charity that provides similar services), a lot of their funding is going to come from the council and it's not likely to have been a great year for them, financially. The Dunblane Street service specifically operated at a £55k deficit for 20/21. The vast majority of their income for the service was not from residents' contributions (of the £900k income, only £66k was residents' contributions). So what you're experiencing is an overburdened care sector that's underfunded in all respects trying to make do with what it can. It's not profiteering. Which I recognise won't make poor treatment feel any less poor, but I hope it helps you to understand the strain the staff members are under. by dddiamonddd (Tue 15th Nov 2022 4:17pm)

The Kingston bridge is terrible for this as well. No actual need for it to be as choked up as it is if people actually knew how to drive on the motorway. Namely, not 3 inches from the bumper of the car in front. I can join the motorway at Silverburn and get all the way to the exit at the infirmirary without touching my brakes once because I leave massive gaps. That get filled by twats who think the city centre lane on the bridge is the "skip the traffic you are literally causing by forcing your way into the lane you want at the last possible second" lane. by dddiamonddd (Sat 19th Nov 2022 8:26pm)

If everyone gets into the correct lane in plenty of time and then doesn't ride each other's bumpers then traffic will not back up. > The merging lane provides a whole second lane to potentially cut the tailback in half no? It doesn't in practice, because it causes it. Because people in the main lanes are sitting so close to each other, the people using the city centre lane (to skip the traffic) have to force their way in, which causes the main lane to brake, which causes the people behind them to brake, which causes the traffic that the city centre lane skippers are, well, trying to skip. There's no actual need for a tailback if everyone driving on the motorway left plenty of space between cars, even when it's busy. I have "fixed" traffic on the M77 by staying far enough back from the car in front that I end the chain of braking by not having to brake at all - just come off the accelerator - and traffic can stay moving at a reasonable pace. I can and do routinely get all the way through my commute without touching my brakes once by doing this during peak times, never even coming to a stop, just by letting a gap open up between . The problem arises when people cannot abide any open space and cut in front of me just so they can ride the bumper of the car I was behind. https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/driving-advice/traffic-jams-what-causes-them/ by dddiamonddd (Sat 19th Nov 2022 10:29pm)

My phone automatically detects songs being played around me and collates them into a big list. Any that it doesn't immediately recognise, I can make it connect to the internet and it'll basically Shazam it, but it's much more subtle. It's a Google Pixel 6 Pro, not sure if the feature is on any other Android phones. It's called "Now Playing" and it shows the song that's currently playing on the lock screen. by dddiamonddd (Wed 23rd Nov 2022 12:43pm)

StepChange are the gold standard for debt management help. You genuinely aren't going to find anywhere that's better. by dddiamonddd (Wed 23rd Nov 2022 9:08pm)

What, exactly, is it that you want from a financial advisor? What do you think they'll do for you? Because they don't really just "chat about finances". Financial advisors are usually more in the investments side of things. I'm an accountant and I'll give you this advice for free - You almost certainly don't need a financial advisor. You need to make a budget and you need to stick to it. Improving savings is done by increasing your income and/or decreasing your spending. Both, ideally. But spending less is, generally speaking, easier than it is to increase your income. Increasing your income is extremely dependent on your own situation and skills, so any advice about that would be too generic. But most people have room to decrease their spending without massively impacting their quality of life. List out all of your expenditure - break it down based on monthly mandatory (so, rent, energy, etc), monthly discretionary (gym memberships? Netflix? anything that you pay for monthly that you would give up if you had to), annual/anything other than monthly expenses and when they're due (car insurance, servicing, annual subscriptions, etc), recurring expenditure that's mandatory & how much it usually is (be generous in estimates) like food, commuting costs, etc. And finally any discretionary spending you want to budget for. I give myself £150 a month to spend however I like. You'll need to consider what a reasonable figure is for yourself. How much money do you have left? Now think about savings goals - not just a house, remember you need to pay fees to buy a house, you'll need furniture, all those kinds of things. how much do you need and when do you need it by? Work out how much you'd need to be setting aside each month to achieve that. If you can do that with what's left after doing the above, great. But you need to stick with it. if you can't save that much, then you need to look hard at your expenses and think where you can cut back - can you get a cheaper phone contract? Cheaper internet? Can you take some steps to use less gas & electricity? Are you paying for subscriptions you don't use? Are you buying name-brand everything at the supermarket even though you know fine well own brand would be perfectly fine? Are you being too generous with your discretionary spending budget? That sort of stuff, a financial advisor is NOT going to talk to you about. That's not their job. I like a zero-based budget. It's basically just like dividing up your money into envelopes and requires you to be actively considering your budget every time you spend money. If there's no money in the "going out for dinner" "envelope", you need to take money from another "envelope". If you don't want to do that, then you're not going out for dinner. See also /r/UKPersonalFinance, /r/UKFrugal. by dddiamonddd (Fri 25th Nov 2022 11:27am)

There's a few brain cells floating around in the Clyde from time to time. by dddiamonddd (Fri 25th Nov 2022 12:14pm)

Who's "mr accountant"? by dddiamonddd (Sun 27th Nov 2022 4:08pm)

I've seen people getting dropped off as well. A big Merc SUV dropping a two women off on the street behind Queen Street station early in the morning, then I saw the same two women sitting begging on Buchanan Street later that day. by dddiamonddd (Sun 4th Dec 2022 9:17am)

I used to see that dog coming up in the Dogspotting facebook group all the time, and anyone who said that dog was drugged/abused got shouted down because apparently, a cute dog that these people could see couldn't possibly be abused... by dddiamonddd (Sun 4th Dec 2022 9:16am)

I wonder where they got their degree in Romani Studies. Hope it wasn't funded by SAAS because it sounds like it was a waste of SAAS's money. by dddiamonddd (Sun 4th Dec 2022 9:20am)

Any valuable information needs to go to the police, not to OP. OP has even said in the title that people with information should get in touch with the police. by dddiamonddd (Mon 5th Dec 2022 11:12am)

It's one of those things that's implied and doesn't need to be explicitly said. "Hope she's found safe" reads very differently to "hope she's not found injured", despite the core sentiment being the same. Neither speaker wants her to be found injured or dead. It's just that the latter is directly putting the feared thing (that she is injured/dead somewhere) into the head of the person you're saying it to. by dddiamonddd (Mon 5th Dec 2022 11:11am)

Nah, only certain types of postage will give you options so it depends on what the sender has used. The closest to getting them to hold it, as far as I know, is the Keepsafe service where they won't deliver until the time period you've chosen has passed but that's for going on holiday/away for a longer time rather than what you're after. by dddiamonddd (Mon 5th Dec 2022 10:59pm)

Are you willing to go further out? Check near train stations that get you in to Central or Queen Street quickly and you can find decent places for reasonably cheap. by dddiamonddd (Sat 31st Dec 2022 1:41pm)

They've always been shite. 12 years ago, I asked them to pierce my right nostril and the guy told me only lesbians get their right nostril pierced, so they pierced the left. I was too much of a 16 year old shitebag to challenge them on that... by dddiamonddd (Sun 1st Jan 2023 6:18pm)

£250k might get you a two bed terraced new build, maybe. Maybe a little back garden. Nae parking either. by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd Jan 2023 10:01am)

If you know of this occuring, please report it to the council's external auditors for investigation. Procurement fraud is a big deal. Just so you know, all regulated contracts with public bodies over £50k are all available to view here: https://www.publiccontractsscotland.gov.uk/Contracts/Contracts_Search.aspx?AuthID=AA00196 If you know of a business which would be considered a related party due to connection to a councillor which has been engaged by a council for a contract, please let the external auditors know. I see a lot of these accusations about all councils, and yet I, as an auditor for a couple of councils (not gonna say which for hopefully obvious reasons!) have only seen one accusation of it made in any proper capacity (that turned out to have no basis and was just Some Guy who had a bone to pick with a councillor). But Facebook and Reddit are full of folks who seem to know all about this procurement fraud. I wonder why they never actually report it to anyone who could do anything about it? by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd Jan 2023 10:14am)

Hey u/GhandisMcGonagall why did you delete all of your comments with your allegations? I can put you in touch with the Glasgow City Council external auditors if you want? You can even go direct to Audit Scotland if you like. It's really important you share the information you have. by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd Jan 2023 1:04pm)

Think they deleted all their comments. Shitebag. by dddiamonddd (Tue 3rd Jan 2023 1:07pm)

Tesco Silverburn had a shitload of red peppers earlier today (around 10am). Went there after not being able to find any in other Tescos. by dddiamonddd (Mon 20th Feb 2023 10:34pm)

What medication are you on? When I got diagnosed, my GP at the time was just like "yeah just wear gloves". Had no idea medication was possible! by dddiamonddd (Wed 8th Mar 2023 5:57pm)

Ban it directly outside the front door of health services. If they want to protest within sight of it, then fine I guess. Though it's questionable whether this is anything other than just trying to intimidate people. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Mar 2023 9:26am)

Do these people genuinely not realise that Sandyford offers a lot more than just abortion? Are they protesting against smear tests, endometriosis care, support services for victims of sexual assault, menopause support...? For all they fucking know, there might not be a single solitary person trying to access Sandyford for abortion services at the time they're there, so instead they're just shouting at people going for a routine smear test or to chat about their options to cope with menopausal symptoms. Very effective. Bunch of absolute arseholes. by dddiamonddd (Sat 11th Mar 2023 9:30am)

In addition to the apparent lack of actually looking on gumtree - OP said they have a single bed that is (I assume) new, or at least newer than the mouldy one they're sleeping on, provided by the Welfare Fund, but they won't sleep on it because it's a single and a plastic mattress (not sure what that means). by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Mar 2023 10:28am)

I'm not sure I follow why a single bed, even if it is a plastic mattress, would be *worse* than a mattress that's got springs sticking out of it and is probably mouldy? by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Mar 2023 10:25am)

Sorry mate, have you actually read what OP has said? OP is allegedly sleeping on a mattress that has springs sticking out of it and was found outside and soaking wet. It is going to be absolutely fucking teeming with mould because I very much doubt that OP has access to a good dehumidifier to seal in a room with that mattress. *Back pain* is the least of OP's worries if they are indeed sleeping on such a mattress. And I can't see what, exactly, OP would take issue with on at least one of the links provided on Gumtree. If they aren't appropriate, then OP needs to *explain* why not. As for assuming the worst, when an OP is dismissing out of hand basically every suggestion that is made to them, it more often than not has turned out to be someone who is actually gunning for donations. Or good quality stuff that they can turn around and sell. OP hasn't asked for anything, fine, but they're making it difficult to believe that they're in such dire circumstances when they're being choosey to an extreme about what they'll replace their allegedly shit-tip mattress with. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Mar 2023 11:39am)

They're an individual living alone and so a single bed will do them fine as a temporary measure, rather than sleeping on the manky, broken mattress they have right now? Aye sure single beds aren't great to sleep in as an adult but there comes a point where you just need to put up with it. by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Mar 2023 4:53pm)

Mate what the fuck are you on about? Have you actually read anything that has been said? No, I wouldn't want to sleep on a mouldy mattress. So if I had any other bed in the house, like OP does, because OP has received a bed from the Welfare Fund, I would sleep on that while I work on getting a bed I prefer. A clean single bed is better than a mouldy, broken double, is it not? Or is it such a fuckin hardship to sleep on a clean single bed (which OP ALREADY HAS!) that it's unreasonable to tell OP to do that instead of sleeping on the health hazard bed? by dddiamonddd (Sun 12th Mar 2023 10:43pm)

And a mouldy one with broken springs is? Perhaps if you want respiratory problems. by dddiamonddd (Tue 14th Mar 2023 8:26am)

> I also see the cans and bottles strewn over the place that I’m certain the weans are drinking as well but no one is shouting to ban alcohol, or even alcohol that comes in containers that could be marketed towards young people. A large part of my objection to disposable vapes is the fact that when they're dumped on the ground, it's a lithium ion battery being dumped on the ground. Cans and bottles obviously have an environmental impact when littered, but a battery is much worse. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Mar 2023 5:58pm)

What changes do you propose to the battery? What batteries are available that will not cause environmental damage when they're breached? I'm no expert, but I'm not aware of any. Batteries are just small containers for chemical reactions that release energy and I'm not aware of any battery that has meaningful capacity that has chemicals in it that would be fine to have in the environment. As for your idea of bins... people don't even put them in the bins that we have. They're not chucking them on the ground out of any sense of trying to properly dispose of batteries, after all. Why would they go from not putting them in any bin at all, to putting them into a special vape bin? by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Mar 2023 6:36pm)

Parking is decriminalised, so the police won't have been lifting them for parking. Parking is the council's problem. by dddiamonddd (Mon 27th Mar 2023 10:32am)

It's going to City Property Operations SL3. Or City Property SL Operations 3. There's two LLPs set up with those names. One will hold the asset and one will hold the loan. They're not subsidiaries of City Property Glasgow (Investments) LLP, they're 99.99% owned by GCC, controlled by them, and GCC is considered the parent. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:18pm)

This is the third one they've done. They did the first one in 2019. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:16pm)

It's a perfectly normal way for a local authority to raise capital. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:24pm)

DELETED They have retained the assets. It's 99.99% owned subsidiary controlled by the Council. They still own and control them. The assets they've done a sale and leaseback with haven't even left their balance sheet because of it. You're angry because you don't understand accounting. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:23pm)

They are still owned by the Council. Ownership transferred from GCC to a 99.99% owned subsidiary, controlled by them, and consolidated back into their financial accounts. The subsidiary borrows money against the asset. The Council pays the subsidiary rent that covers the loan payments. At the end of the loan, the subsidiary will be shut down and the assets will come back into the Council's direct ownership. This is a function of Councils having limited options for private borrowing, as opposed to anything nefarious. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:21pm)

Only Kelvingrove and City Chambers are in this leaseback for approx £200m. The others were in previous leasebacks (named SL1 and SL2). by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:20pm)

DELETED Having a security on an asset does not transfer control of that asset. I assume you're using the layperson understanding of "control" here and not the accounting definition, which is what I use since I'm an accountant. The asset is under the control of the SL3 entities that GCC set up last year to facilitate this. Those entities are 99.99% owned by GCC, thus GCC has control. This is a very normal way of accessing financing for a local authority and I assure you, the covenants won't be incredibly strict. Contrary to popular opinion, these lenders don't want to take possession of assets like Kelvingrove and the City Chambers. They won't sell quickly if they have to sell them. It'll be a pain. They'd much rather get their money back plus interest. The Council's finances are certainly tight, but they are obligated by statute to prepare a balanced budget every year and I'd quite happily bet my entire net worth on the lease payments being a priority. But, y'know, since you're such an expert on local authorities, please talk me through what financing options you think there would be for the equal pay obligations that GCC have been left with thanks to mismanagement by previous councils? Because it's around £770m, split across about 3 years, so let's say £250m a year. Let's have a wee think, shall we? - Their council tax income for 2021/22 based on their unaudited financial statements for 21/22 was £243m. So I guess they could have slightly more than doubled that for 2020/21, 2021/22 and 2022/23 and that would cover it, roughly? I mean, I'm pretending here that they actually could have done that since the cap on council tax was in place from 2007 through to 21/22, so that actually was never an option across that timeframe. But let's kid on it was. I wonder how people would have felt about council tax doubling right at the start of the pandemic and carrying on into this cost of living crisis? - Their non-domestic rates income for 21/22 was £224m, so three years of doubling that? Oh, but poundage rates are set by the Scottish Government, and rateable values by the SAA. They can't influence their NDR income. - A fair amount of their funding is "restricted", which means that it can only be spent on the specific purpose that they've been given it for. - A significant chunk of their unrestricted funding comes from the general revenue grant - £1.16bn in 2021/22. They already get the largest revenue grant in Scotland by quite a big margin, and they did already try asking for an uplift in the revenue grant to cover equal pay, which they didn't get. Clearly. Council tax is the only significant income source they have that the Council can actually control, and that's only 14% of their revenue funding. But, y'know, feel free to have a nosey through their accounts and let me know if you see any areas where they could raise £770m quickly! https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=17613 Just make sure you're referencing the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 and The Local Authority (Capital Finance and Accounting) (Scotland) Regulations 2016, probably some other legislation I can't remember, just to be certain that whatever suggestion you make aligns with what the council can actually do. I think you'll see pretty quickly that when you need to get your hands on £770m quickly and the Scottish Government can't or won't give you it, secured financing is pretty much the only option. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 10:50pm)

DELETED People already told you the short version of this (that sale and leaseback is functionally the only option they had) and you were a smarmy fuck in response. If you don't appear to be asking questions in good faith, why would you expect people to respond to you in absolute good faith? I responded because, ultimately, I don't just want *you* to know about this, I would like anyone who reads this to understand what has happened and why. You could have looked at their financial statements and seen for yourself the bit where they talk about their funding and they literally say: > Council Tax income is the only significant funding source within the council’s control, albeit restricted by the Scottish Government’s budget commitments in recent years. This funding represents only around 14% of total revenue funding, limiting the council’s capacity to vary expenditure through raising Council Tax income. You're going on about how you don't think this is the "ideal solution" to the problem, when you evidently don't know anything about what solutions are available to them in the first place (namely that there's functionally none other than secured lending against their assets) and didn't try and read about it before blustering about how you think they're doing the wrong thing. It is absolutely exasperating to see. > Is this how folk talk to people now? By providing factual information to someone who is talking like they know more than they evidently do? > The absolute state of this reply shows that something is amiss. What is "amiss", exactly? > You know what, fuck it, good luck to the council. Let's never query anything again. Query it all you like. The Council publish basically everything - the financial statements are a great point of reference for information about how the sale & leaseback works. As are all the minutes of the meetings. Boring reading, I assure you, but if you want to know what the Council is doing and why, it's all in there for you to read. But it does help if you engage with the question with the awareness that you're not an expert on it. > All I wanted to know was, why sell off assets when surely(hopefully) there was something better. And now you know. So I've achieved what I set out to do. You now know more about council funding options than you did approximately 11 hours ago. If you think I'm an arsehole for how I shared that knowledge, that's fine. I can live with that. My patience with people who fundamentally don't understand accounting but get incredulous when corrected about it is at basically zero today. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 11:06pm)

DELETED I'm sorry that someone being blunt with you on the internet when you pass judgement on situations you know nothing about affects you in this way. It's not naive to wonder and ask. It is pretty eye-roll inducing when you, in your lack of knowledge, say you don't believe that it's the ideal solution when you offer absolutely nothing in the way of another suggestion because you don't know enough to even understand the implemented solution in the first place. You didn't "continue to query", your tone of the comment where you explained what you understood and asked "what have I not understood?" didn't come across as "I realise I may not know anything about this", it was "this situation seems simple to me and I understand it, why have you suggested that I don't?". If that wasn't the sentiment, then you worded that one in a strange way in my opinion. Your tone throughout is incredulous, coming at it from the presumption that there *must* be something wrong with this way of doing it, whether you think that's corruption, incompetence, or whatever else. Case in point: You called it "asset stripping" in your OP, so you had very obviously formed a strong opinion based on your perception of what has happened. You literally said "of which they had other options" in your OP, which we now know that you didn't know anything about what other options might exist, except asking the Scottish Government. *You* didn't come at this like you were a layperson just trying to understand, you came at it having decided already that it was the wrong decision. If you want people to believe you were just asking a good faith question, you may want to review how you ask those questions. by dddiamonddd (Fri 31st Mar 2023 11:26pm)

I would love to see how you'd deliver building and joinery materials on a cargobike. I'm all for cargobikes and they should absolutely be used more than they are, but it's not like everything that moves through the city can realistically fit on one. by dddiamonddd (Sun 2nd Apr 2023 12:48am)

Wow you have really misunderstood what it means by "showman's goods vehicles". You think a builder is going to get an exemption because sometimes the people who run funfairs will use a similar van to move their stuff to and from the funfair? by dddiamonddd (Tue 4th Apr 2023 11:04am)

You're not being told "look for a woman" as if you're just looking for any woman whatsoever. You have a photo. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 2:06pm)

Probably because it doesn't really matter what she did a while ago, in the context of her being missing, and the tone comes across weird, like they're questioning why they should care. There's a photo of her right there, and that'll have been chosen because it's the most representative of her. So it's not like anyone needs to know "she smashed up HSBC" to assist in finding her. So it's just a weird thing to ask about. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 2:05pm)

I'm not following what point you're trying to make there. You said you had no clue why they were being downvoted. That's why they were being downvoted. It is a public forum, yes, but downvotes are for comments that don't add anything to the discussion. Does it help one bit to say "this is the person who smashed up HSBC"? Like, is that going to make it easier, even to a slight degree, to find her? No. Especially considering the first couple of articles I found about HSBC actually blurred her face in them and didn't state her name, so it isn't like directing anyone towards those articles provides more photos or useful information about her. So commenting that doesn't add to any discussion, does it? Hence, downvotes. If the intent of the comment is to question why the commenter should care, that's also going to get downvotes. > we don't need to batter it on a bat signal to show how empathetic we are publicly. Okay... What's your point? Never said anyone is obligated to comment anything positive, did I? I don't think "thoughts and prayers" (genuine ones I mean, not sarcastic ones) type comments add to any discussion either, but at least they don't come across as dismissive. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 2:19pm)

So this is a really fucking insensitive comment to make... by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 5:02pm)

So you're not saying there is a correct time, but if someone doesn't discuss issues at the "correct time", then it's fine to discipline them? But if you're saying there isn't a correct time... you see the issue here? If you're not asserting that there is even such a thing as a correct time, or indeed when that might be, then that means grievances can never be aired because there's never a correct time. You see the problem with your logic? by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 5:09pm)

I'm not totally sure what your point is here. Does a union need to be recognised for it to be legitimate? If it were that easy to de-legitimise a union, wouldn't any and all employers then just decline to recognise any union ever, and therefore take the teeth out of any attempt at unionisation? This is the first I've heard about any of this, so what exactly is the problem with what was done? by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 5:06pm)

Sure, we don't know the ins and outs. But you *are* simulataneously suggesting that workers need to raise their grievances at the "correct time" while also acknowledging there might not be such a thing. The fact that you appear to be coming at this from an angle that is pro-owner rather than pro-worker is interesting. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 5:16pm)

> I am also friends with people who own businesses. What a shock! > There are definitely wrong times. But what is the correct time? There's no point saying "ah that's the wrong time" without explaining precisely when the correct time is. > but during service isn’t going to get you what you want. It’s just going to get you backlash. Which is exactly what happened? So do you think that these workers went immediately to walking out during service? That there were zero attempts at discussion before that point? It's hardly a protest if it doesn't make an impact. Quietly asking to be treated better and hoping people who are literally invested in getting the maximum work out of you for the minimum pay will somehow decide to suddenly be better because you said please never got anyone anywhere. If the employer treats employees like shit, then they deserve to have their business sink and be shamed for that behaviour, frankly. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 5:24pm)

1st comment: > also kind of agree that if you are protesting instead of discussing issues at the correct time- then you should be disciplined. Second comment, when asked directly when the correct time is: > I’m not saying there is a correct time. How do you reconcile those two statements, exactly? Fucking hypocrite. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Apr 2023 5:33pm)

It's been three months you fucking lunatic. by dddiamonddd (Mon 24th Apr 2023 5:37pm)

It's slivery to... tell you how and where to report the information you claim to have about fraud at a major council? A fraud that, if I remember rightly, you were really annoyed about? To the exact people empowered to do something about it, who really want to know the information you seem to think you have? You're a shitebag. Takes 5 mins to write an email with whatever detail you've got. If you gave a shit about financial impropriety at the council and you actually had anything but conspiracy theories, you'd be doing the city a favour to report it. But you're just a shitebag who lies on the internet. by dddiamonddd (Mon 24th Apr 2023 9:30pm)

It's an insult to him by... comparing him to a woman/a lesbian. And nothing else. It's also saying that you think lesbians are masculine and, I suppose, ugly, which is ridiculous. You view it as insulting to be compared to a lesbian, otherwise you wouldn't have made the comparison. You can insist that you *personally* wouldn't be insulted if someone compared you to a lesbian, but at best, all you're doing is using the assumed misogyny and homophobia of the person you're insulting as a way of insulting them. That's you participating in misogyny and homophobia, whether you think you are or not. And some of the most casually misogynistic and homophobic (towards queer women) that I've ever met have been gay guys. You are not immune to being homophobic and misogynistic because you're gay. by dddiamonddd (Fri 28th Apr 2023 10:18am)

So... try showering? Feliway calming sprays? Before you go surrendering the cat? I can't work out why you've immediately gone to surrendering the cat because of some out of the ordinary behaviour that *might* be dealt with as easily as showering. And even if showering doesn't fix it... you have a spare room! Keep the cat in there, explore options with the vet. Sudden changes in behaviour could be indicative of all kinds of things that may be treatable! You aren't helping your cat's well-being by just punting her off to an unfamiliar environment with unfamiliar people and letting them try deal with it. by dddiamonddd (Fri 28th Apr 2023 1:58pm)

A vet who can't deal with a stressed out cat is a shitty vet. I don't believe a vet said this, but if they did, find another. Especially when it's a cat that has otherwise been absolutely fine for years. The thought of a vet saying "nah, won't see her until the behaviour *that is distinctly a problem due to its sudden, unprompted onset and could be indicative of conditions that need treated* has subsided" is fucking baffling. by dddiamonddd (Fri 28th Apr 2023 2:02pm)

Doesn't seem like it. I've skimmed what I can find on GCC's website about it. I did find this: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=17578 But that asserts that you have the right to expect to be able to pay for your journey in cash. Not card. They are, however, obligated to turn the meter on. When they do cash only, they also often don't turn on the meter as they are supposed to (per the conditions attached to the taxi driver's license here: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=17621). by dddiamonddd (Sun 30th Apr 2023 12:37pm)

Every tenement I've lived in has been 4 stories, so it can't be the case that it's legally required if it's more than 3 stories. I'd assume anything newly built would have some kind of requirement for accessibility reasons, but they're clearly not applying it to existing buildings. by dddiamonddd (Sun 30th Apr 2023 6:30pm)

I dunno about you, but if I see a woman shouting a lot of swear words at a man, I tend to stop and pay attention. by dddiamonddd (Sat 6th May 2023 10:01am)

Neither does sugar. Hangovers are dehydration. You need water and electrolytes. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 9:23am)

And if I eat certain vegetables, I'll get the shits. Therefore, those vegetables are bad and shouldn't be eaten. Aspartame hasn't been demonstrated to have any negative effects in normal doses. Some people have individual sensitivities, sure, but people have individual sensitivities to all kinds of things. It doesn't make that thing inherently bad or unhealthy. Should you drink a lot of sweetened drinks (whether that's artificially or with sugar)? No. You should be mostly drinking water because water is the best way to hydrate. Sugar, however, has been demonstrated to be pretty bad for us when it's consumed from non-natural sources. The sugar in fruit is fine because it's coming along with nutrients, fibre, etc. But if you tried to eat 40g of sugar in one sitting in the form of fruit and vegetables, you'd probably struggle (and get the shits), but 40g of sugar in a drink is easy. This is why sugar recommendations tend to be about added sugar, rather than sugar in general. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 9:24am)

It's essentially that each one came out with a Diet version, usually a long time ago, but it didn't taste like the full sugar one. Then, each brand has then later come out with one that tastes more like the full sugar version. eg. Max, Extra, Coke Zero, etc. But the Diet versions do have a market of people who prefer those because they do taste different and it's not in anyone's interest to stop selling the Diet versions as long as it keeps selling. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 9:29am)

And a lot of people aren't but loads of folk think it's toxic when it's just not. Joke or not, doesn't read any different to any other bit of misinformation about it. Hardly a lecture. Just a couple of sentences. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 11:14am)

Which still isn't a cure for a hangover because if you don't get water and electrolytes, the wee burst of energy fades and you're still hungover. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 11:12am)

Nah I save them up and use them to take three weeks off later in the year. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 11:34am)

Depends. How long after is "after" and how urgent is it? Very soon and urgent, congratulations on your IBS or some other bowel condition that might be worth speaking to a doctor about. by dddiamonddd (Mon 8th May 2023 1:23pm)

They're in plenty of foods. Google it. by dddiamonddd (Tue 9th May 2023 1:46am)

Because you don't work 100% of the time the festival is on. I worked on the bars at T in the Park (paid) years ago and you had a rota. A minimum number of hours each day to do, but outside of those hours, your time was yours and you definitely had a lot of time to go see artists. They also were willing to slide shifts and breaks around for you to go see who you wanted. I also got put on one of the bars closest to the headliner I wanted to see as well and had a decent view. We got speaking to volunteer stewards and they had lower minimum hours than the paid bar staff did, so I reckon it was even more of a free ticket for them. Obviously you need to manage your expectations about which artists you'd get to see, because you couldn't see them all, but I never met someone who didn't get to see at least some artists. by dddiamonddd (Thu 11th May 2023 8:45am)

That fact that you're in a private let just means the factor has a relationship with your landlord, rather than you. Contact your landlord. by dddiamonddd (Tue 16th May 2023 12:36pm)

Make sure you're valuing both your time and your travel costs. If those 5 different shops are in walking distance, cool, it's just your time that matters, but if you're travelling between them by car, make sure it's genuinely worthwhile once you account for fuel. And, I suppose, extra wear on your car though that's obviously far more nebulous. I think people often forget about the cost of actually going to the shops when considering savings because the cost only arrives later down the line when you go to fuel up. by dddiamonddd (Wed 17th May 2023 5:36pm)

I think they think India is a Muslim country... by dddiamonddd (Fri 26th May 2023 8:50pm)

I like the people who walk past my house and shove their litter in the gap between the brick and the fence, or chuck it over the fence into the space in front of my garage door. It's great. Big fan. Really love it when they do that. by dddiamonddd (Sat 3rd Jun 2023 11:16am)

> Texasbeeworks every time I watch her videos, I'm nervous. by dddiamonddd (Sun 11th Jun 2023 11:17am)

Weird. by dddiamonddd (Mon 12th Jun 2023 12:58pm)

Turning your head while squatting or deadlifting is a good way to increase your risk of injury. It changes your form a bit. by dddiamonddd (Tue 13th Jun 2023 6:36pm)

With friends and coaches to give feedback on form. People were not weightlifting to anywhere near the same amount as they do now and especially not alone. Filming a form check is the only way to see yourself from that angle properly, plus people use online coaches or groups/subreddits/etc to get other people to check their form. I'm not saying it's fine for people to be filming literally everything constantly, just that there's good reason to film sometimes. People just need to be respectful of others around them if they do. by dddiamonddd (Wed 14th Jun 2023 6:04am)

If the total purchase was over £100 (even if only part of said purchase was on the credit card, eg. if you paid a £10 deposit on the card and the remaining £90+ on a different card). Anyone who paid less than £100 won't be able to use Section 75 and will need to go the regular dispute route which is more questionable in terms of success. by dddiamonddd (Wed 21st Jun 2023 9:28am)

I lived there about 8 years ago and all I can see having changed is that it's fucking expensive to live in compared to when I was there. by dddiamonddd (Wed 21st Jun 2023 9:53am)

Not undercover - unmarked and driven by plain clothes officers. The officers will identify themselves as police when they interact with someone. There's a distinction between that & undercover. by dddiamonddd (Thu 22nd Jun 2023 11:17pm)

> crosswalks Where are you from, exactly? What's a crosswalk mate? Also, you vastly overestimate the cost to chuck up some flags. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 9:17pm)

Well, genuinely, they have the budget that they have, literally the only part they have any influence over is council tax and that's a grand total of about 14% of their overall income, and *something* has got to give. There really isn't anything they could cut that people wouldn't take issue with. What should they cut instead? Is there a thing that would be okay for them to cut that would also free up a material amount of cash? I'm more familiar than average with councils and their finances (I'm an auditor) and I'm not convinced there is an "okay" option. Just different degrees of bad. The problem isn't the council - because I can assure you, every single council is having this issue to some degree - the problem is coming from well above them. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 9:16pm)

I think this shows a massive dose of ignorance about what the issue actually is and why it's a problem. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 9:22pm)

The Equal Pay settlements (the ones that have resulted in 3 separate sale and leaseback arrangements to fund them, the most recent involving Kelvingrove) were down to a Labour pay grading system that meant roles with primarily women in them were paid less than equivalent roles which were primarily staffed by men though. That wasn't the current GCC's fault, but it is their problem to deal with and fund. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 9:19pm)

While I 100% understand what you're saying, the question is where you would prefer for them to cut funding from? They could cut proper mental health care, but that seems like an even worse option. Schools? Fuck no. Care for vulnerable people? Again, seems like a really bad option. The power of a council to borrow is limited, and they're obligated to post a balanced budget. Keeping back reserves is practically not possible given how tight the budget is. Spending more in one area means spending less somewhere else. If not provision of cultural services, genuinely, where should they cut instead? by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 9:33pm)

I see that the concept of sarcasm escapes you. And see to be fair, I'd say you're not welcome for the casual homophobia, not the use of the word "crosswalk". But sure mate, if you wanna believe it's because you used a synonym, go for it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 10:13pm)

Do they use crosswalk there? Weird. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 10:12pm)

DELETED Thanks for the update. Did you do literally anything about it? by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 10:23pm)

With absolutely no respect to you whatsoever, knowing that a casual homophobe who takes issue with pride flags doesn't find me funny is just fine by me. I'm happy about it, actually. I don't want homophobes to like me! You're just not the audience I'm hoping to make laugh. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 10:20pm)

I assume you meant homophobic there? If so - Sure. Internalised bigotry is absolutely a thing. There's a variety of reasons why that can occur, but it certainly does happen. For example, a gay man can be homophobic if he is overly critical of gay men he perceives as being too flamboyant and feminine, or too open about their sexuality. If he thinks that being a flamboyant gay man is cringey or creates a poor impression of gay men in general or upholds stereotypes of gay men and that behaving in a "stereotypical" way is worthy of criticism. It can be both conscious and unconscious. There's no good reason to be against the display of a Pride flag. Perhaps participating in Pride isn't your thing, and that's fine. LGBT+ people are not by any means obligated to celebrate or take part in Pride and activism. That's up to each individual to decide how involved in the wider community of LGBT+ people they want to be. But I don't think it's a good look if you look down upon others within the LGBT+ community if they do choose to take part. If you meant homophonic, I dunno, go ask the Royal Conservatoire. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 11:02pm)

> I absolutely wont stand for what it is being used today Could you articulate what that is? > have a look at what is happening in USA Again, what is that? > Neither will most of gay man or woman that I know. See, I know loads of gay people and I dunno, maybe it's a generational thing because if you're referring to what I think you're referring to, that's not the stance my friends in their 20s and early 30s take. > Pride is no longer about gay rights. What is it about now then, in your eyes? I don't necessarily want to jump to any conclusions, but I feel like the vague referencing is referring to a specific letter within the acronym LGBT+, perhaps? Where the rights of said people are under very intense debate (especially in the US, but here too)? If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me, but you're under no obligation to do so. It's just the only thing I can think of. I'm not going to force you to discuss it if you don't want to. I can't be arsed having an argument with you if it'll always be a stalemate. I'm sure you can't be arsed arguing with me about it either. I'm reasonably sure you won't convince me of your stance, and with the way you've replied, I get the feeling I'd be bashing my head against a wall. Sometimes I'm willing to have an argument I know is utterly pointless for the sake of the people reading, but I genuinely don't want to tonight if it's pointless. Not how I want to spend the remainder of my Thursday night. But I will ask that you really consider what your issue is with what you're handwaving towards (but won't name) and why. If it's the issue that I suspect, if it is trans rights etc - and like I said, you don't need to come back and tell me if I'm right or wrong, this is me talking to the void and you can listen and discuss or you can decide not to engage if you can't be arsed, do what you want (I might just go to sleep soon anyway) - then I genuinely think you've been influenced by people who have never had *your* interests in heart into turning against people who just aren't your enemy at all. They're turning against a particular part of the LGBT+ community because, frankly, the LG part of the acronym is (relatively speaking) "safe". It would be incredibly unpopular to start stripping gay people of legal rights that they have now. But do you really think that if people succeed in pushing down the trans rights movements, the people who want to legislate away people's ability to just exist as themselves because that existence involves a way of existing that some people just can't understand, that they're going to be content to stop there? That those people are totally fine with gay people too and wouldn't start stripping you of your ability to just exist peacefully in society if they got half the chance? You're doing the footwork of bigots, even if only unconsciously. by dddiamonddd (Thu 29th Jun 2023 11:30pm)

Abusive working conditions is fine as long as you're young, I suppose? Who gives a shit about the wellbeing of teenagers. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 11:39am)

If he can't afford to pay decent wages to his staff and he's not interested in treating his staff well and ensuring their safety, his business is shite and he deserves to go under. Him feeding his family shouldn't come at the expense of other people's mistreatment. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 11:38am)

How the fuck is this "patter"? Articulate to me what part of this is "patter" and not just defending an absolute cunt because you're a shitebag? Do you aspire to be the guy who runs a shitey business that treats teenagers like shit or something? by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 11:57am)

Imagine being this much of a bootlicker. If you like the sound of this job so much, working for this prick, away you and do the work. Or is it that you've actually already got decent wages elsewhere? Despite them being mythical according to you. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 12:05pm)

1. You. 2. Because I'm an accountant and everyone I've ever met who would post shite like this on Facebook runs a shitey business. 3. He literally says it. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 12:44pm)

Are you reading the same post I am, or what? You're saying the guy isn't lying. And what he's saying is indicative of a shite workplace with a shite boss to work for. Sorry you're that done in by even shiter bosses that you think this is fine. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 12:46pm)

You do have a problem if you think this is just "patter" and not indicative of a shite boss to work for. If you'd be happy with one of your kids working for a twat like this, I'm concerned. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 12:45pm)

I'm really sorry that your reading comprehension and social skills are failing you at this time. If all of your jobs have been like this, I would strongly suggest you try find another one because I promise you mate, decent workplaces are out there. You don't have to be talked down to by guys like this. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 12:59pm)

But I thought all workplaces were shitty according to you? Pick a fuckin lane. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 1:09pm)

You're coming across as a cunt. If you think I'm raging, carry on. But at least I'm not a bootlicker who thinks this twat has any right to mistreat staff because it's how he pays his bills. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 1:21pm)

I do actually like my job. I'm sorry that you don't, I guess? > Do you even have a job seen as your on the Internet arguing with people over internet trivia at 1 in the afternoon? Part of why I like my job is that it's a job that can, to some degree, be done whenever I like. If I want to spend some time during the day to tell you that you're a twat for defending shite bosses, then I can do that. I assume you have the same flexibility, since here you are too? Pot kettle, if you thought that "do you even have a job" was clever at all. There is a massive fucking canyon between whatever parts of my job that might bug me and the type of boss who calls people idiots and declares he's going to pay you shite wages. The fact that my job is not perfect does not somehow mean that I can't call out this shite for what it is - an abusive boss creating a shitty working environment. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 1:21pm)

Councils are obligated to post a balanced budget. The majority of the council's income is outside of their control. The only one that's material that they have direct influence over is council tax, and I don't think people would be pleased if they bumped that up significantly. It's only about 14% of their total income, so it's certainly not nothing, but Everything else is either small potatoes or it's from the Scottish Government. Their income each year is fixed (functionally). And they need to divide that up amongst everything. They legally can't run a budget deficit, nor a surplus (though it's less of an issue if they end up in surplus - but that's rare). If a budget is being cut, it's either because there literally is no money to put there, so it's being cut relative to what it was funded with last year, or it's because what's being cut from that service is going towards another one. The revenue grants etc have not kept up with inflation at all. The cost of providing every statutory obligation they have has gone way up. Some services have had real terms cuts - as in, same budget as last year, but thanks to inflation, that same amount of money won't achieve as much as it did last year. Others have to get nominal cuts - actual reductions in the nominal value, which obviously stacks with the effect of inflation, so there's less money and what money there is will do even less - because that money has to go towards something else that is deemed more important. Of all the statutory obligations a council has, cultural services is arguably one of the least bad options, but they are all shite options. Because cutting cultural services, as shite as that is, frees up money to try and keep other services funded. They cut there so they don't have to cut the budget of something else. by dddiamonddd (Fri 30th Jun 2023 1:39pm)

/r/onejoke by dddiamonddd (Tue 4th Jul 2023 3:43pm)

Okay but I was talking about GCC's budget specifically. Where should GCC cut in order to operate with the budget it has, if you're against the cut to arts and culture services? GCC can do precisely fuck all about those issues you've listed when it sets its budgets. by dddiamonddd (Tue 11th Jul 2023 3:41pm)

Well, I assure you, they and every other council are having a go at the Scottish Government at every opportunity about it. Genuinely, what the fuck else are they meant to do? Articulate to me what you want councils to do. They can only appeal to the Scottish Government because the Scottish Government who set the revenue grant (which makes up the bulk of every council's income) and the revenue that can be raised through things like Non-Domestic Rates (that's all centrally decided). But then the budget the Scottish Government has is dictated to them by Westminster. So yeah, Westminster are the problem, as they often are, but what in the fuck do you think GCC or any Scottish council can do about that, exactly? This is the thing that does my nut in about this sub. Full of people who think they know how councils work when most of you blatantly don't. If you want to tell me what councils can actually do to get Westminster to give the Scottish Government more money to give to councils, because you sure seem to think there's *something*, I will go and tell the councils I audit to do it tomorrow. And see tbh, you're busy saying "oh we shouldn't squabble over crumbs" while you're the one squabbling rather than recognising you're whining at GCC for something that they literally have to do. You can't tell me where GCC should cut instead of the arts, but they're terrible for doing it. You haven't yet told me where they should cut instead so you can go and look at some art. Positing "ooooh they shouldn't cut anything" aye sure, in an ideal world, every service can be funded exactly to the degree it needs. But that's not where we live. We live in the real world where they have a limited budget and so something has to give. So tell me what you would be happy to see cut. Schools, actual mental health care, bins, roads? Have a look at their financial statements and point out to me which service you think could do with a trimming instead of arts and culture. by dddiamonddd (Tue 11th Jul 2023 9:53pm)

What? Do you think folk in Glasgow don't use the word "bud"? Do you think only people from Chicago say bud? by dddiamonddd (Sat 15th Jul 2023 8:47am)

Because the Scottish Funding Council's funding allocations have been shite for FE for years now, even when they hit their credit targets, and FE have limited options for raising income otherwise. It's not like how HE have the option to bring in more international students based on their reputation, or research projects. FE funding is a shambles and I don't know of any college that hasn't had a shite time of it lately. Plus COVID sent a lot more students to unis instead of colleges. by dddiamonddd (Mon 17th Jul 2023 9:56am)

Feel free to blow the whistle on that unless you're just pulling it out of your arse because *surely* there must be something dodgy going on because you can just feel it. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Jul 2023 12:58pm)

GCC still own it. You just don't understand what a sale & leaseback means, nor the legal structure of it. It is owned by a subsidiary of Glasgow City Council that is 99.99% owned by GCC, which means GCC own City Chambers in the end - it's still on their group balance sheet for 2022/23. Said subsidiary borrowed money against it (same idea as how if you have a house with a mortgage, you own the house, but the bank has dibs on some of the value of it *if* you don't pay them back) and leases it back to GCC. GCC pays rent that's enough to cover the repayment of the loan secured against the City Chambers. When the loan is fully repaid, the subsidiary will be wound up and the ownership of City Chambers will move back to being owned directly by GCC rather than through a subsidiary of GCC. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Jul 2023 1:01pm)

> I don't believe this has been done, certainly haven't seen evidence for it. You do realise all of the minutes of their meetings are published? I don't think you've looked hard enough mate. Maintaining historically, culturally, and architecturally structures like this is actually part of their statutory obligations as a council. People would absolutely kick the fuck off if they sold it (see the reactions to them doing a sale and leaseback where they still ultimately own it). > I personally don't see why the council can't buy a large office building They have plenty of those too. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Jul 2023 1:04pm)

Pulled out your arse. Got it. by dddiamonddd (Fri 21st Jul 2023 1:53pm)

Your comment is controversial. Some people need to go back and re-watch the film. by dddiamonddd (Mon 24th Jul 2023 2:24pm)

The better ones are the dogs who are *on* a lead, with no awareness and no recall, but it's one of those extendable leads with a very thin string, stretched right across the path, that you can't see until you're basically tangled in it. by dddiamonddd (Mon 7th Aug 2023 1:04pm)

You say that like the Deliveroo riders stop at red traffic lights consistently. by dddiamonddd (Mon 7th Aug 2023 6:43pm)

Absolutely seconding lifting. I do powerlifting - low reps, high weights - and it makes me feel so fucking powerful. by dddiamonddd (Tue 8th Aug 2023 4:21pm)

You can definitely just watch a tutorial and have a go. I'd say a lot of PTs are actually quite questionable when it comes to lifting form - every gym I've been in, I've seen plenty of PTs letting clients use poor form with heavy weights. So make sure to choose carefully. Start as light and keep an eye on your form. You can learn a lot about form at home just from using a broom/mop as a 'bar' and filming yourself to compare with videos. It obviously isn't completely comparable to doing a squat or deadlift or bench with a real bar, but you can get to understand where your arms/knees/elbows/etc should be. Don't try and turn your head to look at yourself in a mirror though - you'll hurt yourself like that. Lifting genuinely isn't dangerous as long as you're sensible. That means not going heavy without building up to it over time, not adding weight until you're comfortable with the weight you're currently using, learning how to 'fail', use spotters when you're lifting near your max (people in the weights areas are almost always happy to help!) and using safety equipment (eg. spotter bars on the squat racks - work out how low you go in a squat, and set the bar below that, low enough that you won't hit it when you squat, high enough that you can put the bar down on them and still get out from underneath it). I'd honestly say that trying to lift heavier than their ability allows is the cause of most people's problems with lifting! /r/xxfitness has some lifting programs on their wiki that you can look at! by dddiamonddd (Tue 8th Aug 2023 4:20pm)

I suppose there is a point to be made here about how you can be made to feel unsafe without any specific crime being committed (and/or any crimes don't get reported). Catcalling, being followed, trapped in a conversation, etc. Those can all make me feel unsafe. But all the times that's happened to me walking at night won't turn up in any official statistics because I didn't report to the police that some guy insisted on walking beside me trying to quite aggressively flirt with me for a few minutes. While I could have phoned the police, it wasn't an emergency - they won't flip the sirens on to respond unless he's physically violent. If they respond at all. And phoning them in front of him could certainly escalate things if he is so inclined. They'll just take my details and note it and unless I can get them some ultra specific information about him, they won't be able to identify him. They might well not even bother if I did give them said information. So instead, we politely smile and hope that they go away. And then you'll never see that reflected in any official crime or safety statistics, but you might through studies and polls done to identify the scale of unreported incidents of that nature. But those situations do turn into violence often enough that it's not unreasonable to feel unsafe. by dddiamonddd (Thu 31st Aug 2023 10:01am)

The ownership of anything inside a bin continues to be held by the person who put it there unless there's an actual agreement to the contrary. The mere act of something being in the bin isn't a unilateral statement of intent to dispose of it - stuff gets put in a bin accidentally all the time, after all. It is strongly *suggestive* of it, if it was placed there intentionally, but until the owner allows If I drop my phone into a bin, that doesn't mean Biffa or whoever own it now. Even if I intentionally put it into the bin, I would still have an absolute right to remove it. Biffa or whoever will *take possession* of the contents of the bin when they collect it and take on the responsibility, on behalf of the owner, to dispose of it, but taking possession of it is not the same as gaining ownership of it. When ownership transfers of stuff can be a weirdly complicated question. tl;dr stuff in bins usually still technically belong to the owner. by dddiamonddd (Thu 7th Sep 2023 8:16pm)

What have GCC refurbed that solely benefits them lately? by dddiamonddd (Thu 7th Sep 2023 9:59pm)

More money to allow them to do everything they need and want to do. I audit councils for a living. They're really not that wasteful. They just don't get enough money at all. Council tax is the ONLY material source of income that they have that they have any control over. Everything else is dictated by central government. by dddiamonddd (Thu 7th Sep 2023 10:02pm)

Yeah, the basics! Obviously! If you swing by Blythswood Square on a nice day, you can see them all sunning themselves instead of doing politician things like committee meetings and financial monitoring. by dddiamonddd (Fri 8th Sep 2023 7:23am)

GCC is responsible for an area that sees a lot of use by people who are not resident to that area. That use generates costs for GCC, but they get little to no revenue from those people. All councils have some element of this, don't get me wrong, I'm not by any means suggesting that North Lanarkshire Council incurs costs solely for people who actually live in NLC, but it wouldn't be unreasonable to estimate that a significant amount of people you might see in Glasgow in particular, using GCC provided services, including the roads, don't live in GCC's area of responsibility. But in NLC, there's not many people going *in* to NLC from outside of it. GCC don't get anything extra from the VAT and fuel duty on my petrol used to drive into the city. They don't get any extra money from my vehicle excise duty (it's not road tax). And yeah, people spend money in the city, but it isn't like there's a city-wide sales tax, nor is revenue from non-domestic rates set based on the financial performance of whichever organisation occupies the property. They'll maybe get money from me in the form of parking, assuming I use on street or GCC operated car parks. If I use NCP or Buchanan Galleries, they won't. If I'm there for work, they'll probably get nothing from me. But I can still use their museums and roads and libraries etc. etc. by dddiamonddd (Sat 9th Sep 2023 1:38pm)

NDR is something like 13-14% of GCC's entire income though. by dddiamonddd (Sat 9th Sep 2023 3:43pm)

They're not funded solely through council tax. Council tax and NDR are each about 13-14% of GCC's income, but council tax is the only one they can actually control (but even that is subject to limitations). The rest are centrally determined and/or government revenue grants. The point I'm making is that the revenue received by GCC, in totality, isn't sufficient to allow them to properly fund everything they're statutorily required to and the costs of doing so are impacted heavily by the use of those facilities by people outside of GCC. Revenue grants are often (to overly simplify it) grounded in a mix of area and population. GCC is densely populated and isn't by any means low in population, but the grants aren't really accounting fully for the impact of the volume of people who come to Glasgow and use the facilities. Plus you've got things like increased crime rates and all that. It's a very complicated situation. by dddiamonddd (Sun 10th Sep 2023 11:28am)

£130k got me a three bedroom house with a big garage that was definitely not a shit-tip because I moved further out from Glasgow but still within a 30 minute commute from work. They definitely exist! Got that when my salary was £36.5k too. Also, my mortgage at 6% is £736. That was a 95% mortgage in December/January right as rates went mental. But it was the ideal house for me, so I just went for it. by dddiamonddd (Mon 11th Sep 2023 7:36am)

I wouldn't suggest taking "what you can get" but by all means keep an eye out. I kept looking when rates went mental and found a house that ticked virtually all my boxes. My mortgage is at 6% but I can work with it. I didn't want to pass up an ideal house because it wouldn't be as cheap as it could be. I could still afford it and I'm here for the long term so it wasn't a big deal. by dddiamonddd (Mon 11th Sep 2023 8:05am)

They're actually just a really talented Geoguesser. by dddiamonddd (Mon 11th Sep 2023 8:33pm)

I went to a gig there in 2007 and, being 14 years old at the time, really wanted to be up at the front. Ended up standing side on beside one of the speakers. I don't have full hearing capabilities in the ear that was beside the speaker to this day. by dddiamonddd (Sun 17th Sep 2023 4:33pm)

The right to roam doesn't mean private landowners can't ever block off their land. The right to roam doesn't apply to land beside houses, for example. So I don't have any right to just come into your front garden whenever I like. It's genuinely a case by case basis because it's a shockingly complex area of law. https://www.lindsays.co.uk/news-and-insights/news/clarifying-the-right-to-roam There's also the outdoor access code which has details about what sort of land you can and can't access. https://www.nature.scot/doc/scottish-outdoor-access-code by dddiamonddd (Wed 20th Sep 2023 9:18pm)

I used CR Plasterers for my bedroom and the work was really good. £650 for the full room including ceiling, and that was also including some big areas where the old plaster had fallen off the wall, so it wasn't just a skim. by dddiamonddd (Thu 21st Sep 2023 1:14pm)

I worked for Teleperformance for John Lewis across Christmas years ago and had to lie and pretend I was a JL employee and so had gotten the traditional Christmas bonus. Our targets were also far stricter than what JL's own call center staff in Hamilton had to adhere to. by dddiamonddd (Thu 21st Sep 2023 9:33pm)

"I want to cancel my Sky because I can't afford food" okay but how will you distract your children from their starvation if you don't have the Disney Channel? I did it for less than a year when it was Webhelp and it was absolutely dire. by dddiamonddd (Thu 21st Sep 2023 9:36pm)

It doesn't happen at the club nights or any 18+ gigs where people are ID'd on entry. If people aren't ID'd on entry and it's a 14+ gig, they'll stop you from buying more than one drink if you're by yourself. by dddiamonddd (Mon 16th Oct 2023 12:28pm)

Yeah I think the Catty has a relatively high number of 18+ gigs, so there's a solid possibility that's the case. by dddiamonddd (Mon 16th Oct 2023 1:07pm)

I've always enjoyed the one that tells you to check your eyesight. At a distance where, if your eyesight was poor, you probably couldn't actually read it. by dddiamonddd (Tue 31st Oct 2023 9:36pm)

My grandad from Carluke says Ken, as do a few folk I know from Wishaw. Are we keeping the ken users in or out? by dddiamonddd (Thu 2nd Nov 2023 3:01pm)

Since they shut Ravenscraig, I suppose that's what we were doing anyway with questionable success. by dddiamonddd (Thu 2nd Nov 2023 3:09pm)

I don't know if I should be offended or relieved. Am I free, or am I being abandoned by the Kens? by dddiamonddd (Thu 2nd Nov 2023 3:07pm)

Tapo has a scheduling function too. I think the only benefit (in terms of scheduling) of the Hue ones is that 'randomised' lighting option. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Nov 2023 11:14am)

Not for the smart plugs unfortunately. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Nov 2023 4:53pm)

I literally just had it done on Friday by SPEN's contractor Quartzelec (to get an EV charger). It was an absolute non-issue. I was the end of the loop so I needed a new connection. They dug up from the pavement to where my meter is, including across my garden, lifting monoblock to do it. It wasn't even particularly noisy. They did that on Wednesday. Then on Friday, they came out to do the actual cabling work. The power was off for about 20 minutes. Barely knew it was happening, frankly. Then they came back the next day and put everything back exactly as they found it. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Nov 2023 5:03pm)

You can sometimes tell by looking at the cables, but the big tell is whether turning off the supply to one house turns off the other. It's most common in semi detached and terraced houses. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Nov 2023 5:07pm)

I wonder if mine is just old and dumber than the average smart plug. by dddiamonddd (Mon 6th Nov 2023 6:00pm)

Adoption means the local council has adopted responsibility for it. ie. they maintain it, they decide who gets to use it, etc. If it's not adopted, it's owned by someone who isn't the council (usually the landowner, local residents, whoever) and you need the permission of the owner to drive on it. by dddiamonddd (Mon 13th Nov 2023 2:05pm)

SAMH's information service could maybe point you towards somewhere if the other suggestions don't pan out: https://www.samh.org.uk/informationservice by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 10:05am)

https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=60253&p=0 They publish detailed financial statements. These are the ones for 2022/23 that are currently unaudited. You can also use a Freedom of Information request to get further details if you like. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:49pm)

ITT: people who think £500k is a material amount of money to GCC. Their (unaudited) deficit on the provision of services for 2022/23 was £240m. This isn't even a *dent*. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:47pm)

The final settlement for that has already been agreed and was agreed before the LEZ came in. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:46pm)

Nobody in the council gets bonuses. You can even check this on their financial statements. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:45pm)

The final settlement has been agreed. It hasn't physically been paid yet - final admin stuff is on-going. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:45pm)

They're required to by the legislation that brought in ULEZ related powers. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:54pm)

There's also the budgets: https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/budget And worst case, a Freedom of Information request. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:51pm)

Financial statements - https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=60253&p=0 The deficit on provision of services for 2022/23 was £240m (page 19). Budget - https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/budget Have a look for yourself. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 1:50pm)

Yeah, it's coming from the 3 sale and leaseback transactions that GCC has done over the past few years. The most recent one being the one that included City Chambers and Kelvingrove. That was literally why they did it - to get the amount of money agreed as a settlement for the final cohort of claimants. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 2:44pm)

The mess that is council funding is a lot larger than Labour or any individual council. GCC isn't alone in being in financial dire straits, they just happen to be the biggest with some prominent issues. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 3:04pm)

Council tax is 14% of the council's budget. It's not the monetary heavy hitter you think it is and £500k would do fuck all to reduce your bill. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 3:49pm)

No, because you can't retire at 50 on an LGPS pension outside of exceptional circumstances (mostly ill health retirement, terminal illness, etc), and without taking a big tax hit. In LGPS, you accrue a certain portion of your pensionable salary for the year the employee and employer make contributions. [The most recent accrual is 1/49th](https://www.scotlgpsmember.org/your-pension/paying-in/how-your-pension-is-worked-out/). An LGPS pension otherwise cannot be taken any earlier than 55 (57 from 2028) and if you take it earlier than your state pension age, the benefit received will be reduced (the exception being if you're made redundant). If you take it after, it'll be increased. https://www.scotlgpsmember.org/your-pension/planning/taking-your-pension/ by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 3:55pm)

Sounds like the LEZ was designed to keep you out, if you refuse to use one of the various public transport options like park & ride and trains that could have gotten you into town instead. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 5:52pm)

The WASPI thing didn't. by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 5:50pm)

I'm a public sector auditor who has audited 4 different councils and two LGPS pension funds which have lots of councils as members, including their payroll, in detail. As well as other public sector and governmental organisations. Sincerely, I think I have a better idea of the sick rate and ill health retirement of public sector workers than you do. Are some of them at it? Probably. But why should you let that little minority stress you out to the degree that it does? by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 7:38pm)

Double it. Their expenditure on the provision of services was £3.5bn for 22/23. The year before it was £3.7bn. £500k is a drop in the ocean! by dddiamonddd (Wed 15th Nov 2023 9:27pm)

What's stealthy about it? There's loads of signs telling you at what point you'll become liable for it. by dddiamonddd (Thu 16th Nov 2023 10:59am)

You do realise that GCC's money is fuck all to do with the SNP as a party? No money from GCC is going to the SNP. by dddiamonddd (Thu 16th Nov 2023 11:00am)

Yeah I'm an external auditor. I audit councils. GCC gets most of its money FROM the SG revenue grant. Look at their financial statements. They never send money to political parties. If a council did that, they'd be in breach of the law. Councils are starved for cash as it is. They're not sending money to any political parties. by dddiamonddd (Fri 17th Nov 2023 8:07am)

Literally the only band I give a shit about on there. They're fantastic live but I'm not willing to tolerate the bams. by dddiamonddd (Tue 21st Nov 2023 9:24pm)

I've seen them 6 times since Take To The Skies and they've never disappointed. They are gonna be SO wasted on this crowd. by dddiamonddd (Tue 21st Nov 2023 9:25pm)

But us elder scene kids now have bills to pay! My budget tells me that a TRNSMT ticket just to offset one bam and see Enter Shikari is a bit too much :( by dddiamonddd (Tue 21st Nov 2023 11:28pm)

The thing that's extra frustrating is the amount of the ads that are fundamentally scammy. The bullshit clothing websites where, if you're naive enough to order from them, you're NOT getting what you see in the picture - best case scenario, a poor quality version, at worst, nothing at all. The solar panel/pensions/investments/whatever pish that is, at best, just data harvesting or at worst, a literal scam that'll take money from you and bolt. If the adverts that they had were on ANY LEVEL pre-screened and relevant, then it'd be far better. But I expect that local Glasgow businesses don't have the ad budget available to compete against these shitey adverts and Glasgow Live care far more about the money. by dddiamonddd (Fri 24th Nov 2023 10:35am)

Older folk tend to say it. Not sure I've ever heard it from someone who wasn't roughly my mum's age or older, so 50s+. I think it's also a more working class thing but I'm not 100% on that. by dddiamonddd (Thu 7th Dec 2023 9:13am)

When I worked in McDonalds, you were getting as many sauces as I could fit in my (admittedly quite wee) hand. Nobody was counting them, nobody did a sauce stock take. by dddiamonddd (Thu 7th Dec 2023 10:24am)