North Yorkshire Moors Railway General Discussion

Something I read only this morning said it was to stop the LMS nicking their lamps at Crewe. No idea if that is true or not.

 

Assuming you mean that the NYMR has identified the person responsible, if they were to try and take any action against said person it would prove the point the sign is making. I'd have thought getting into a court case for libel should be the last thing the railway should be worrying about, not least at this time.

If a male manager was called a 'King', or compared to a historical or contemporary dictator, would it be misandrist? Of course not. You imply her gender makes a female manager exempt from criticism.

 

Without knowing who posted it, or their specific beef, commenting on motive is rash, and therefore I'd be reluctant to say whether misogyny is involved - certainly the image could be read in multiple ways there.

As for "libellous", defamation is notoriously difficult and expensive to prove - and that process would involve deep scrutiny.

I'd personally step back from such language, and suggest simply that de-escalation of language might be in order. On all sides.

 

Being serious, if you are in an area with a very frequent service and many junctions, and where delays mean trains do not necessarily run in the sequence set out in the timetable, the answer to the question "who else needs to know" is "the signalman". So in practice, the signalman to the rear of a 'box with a junction would not only give the normal "is line clear ..." type call to a junction signal box in advance, but would also communicate (using a train describer) the intended destination. In that way, the signalman at the junction signal box could set up the correct route when accepting the train.

Tom

 

No one suggested court cases but that doesn't change the nature of the material. Any organisation's Safeguarding duty applies at all levels. De-escalation of what's been posted would involve an apology.

 

De-escalation works two ways - but I agree that an apology would be in order

 

From the poster here, or the person who created the physical poster. I think maybe both.

 

Unfortunately the heritage railway sector has an unenviable record of female CEO's and General Managers being subjected to similar puerile behaviour. We should not be afraid to call it out for what it is.

 

I'm well aware that there has been deeply misogynistic behaviour, and it has no place. At the same time, criticism (even puerile criticism) of women by men is not automatically misogynistic. For what it's worth, I winced when I saw that image, thought it out of order, yet also thought "is it really true that the organisation is led in such a way".

 

Which is presumably what the perpetrator wanted you to think. Since it apparently originated with someone who is neither a member nor a volunteer perhaps it's best interpreted as uninformed nonsense?

 

Totally agree. I found the post on here offensive, and would equally have been offended if I had seen the poster in real life. Who ever created the physical poster ought to be named and shamed.

what ever your views on the NYMR or indeed any organisation, whether railway related or not, no one should ever ever be subject to personal vilification, How would you like to be vilified or have your name plastered all other town or what ever. I certainly wouldn’t. Indeed reposting the picture on here could almost be considered an offence in itself.

 

I'd be content with that - it was the use of language that was both general and possess specific legal meaning that concerned me

 

Probably best not to go there but republishing a libel makes whoever does it equally responsible.

 

And to someone who is not a member, I had absolutely no idea what it was about and moved on.

 

How can you possibly know if the poster was/was not put up by a member or volunteer - do you know all members and volunteers faces and can identify them from (notoriously poor quality) CCTV images?

 

I'm willing to take @Lineisclear's word on that - I suspect there's more to this that is (rightly) not being shared

 

The logic is that it was placed by an employee.

 

More valuable if it had suck and blow capabilties .
Much inproved from its ‘Eric the Feable ‘ days .

 

In the particular circumstances it was relatively easy.

 

I feel there's a bit of mealymouth-edness going on over the "insulting/libelous" post going on here - I don't personally see it a misogynistic but rather as a piece of workplace humour in the "old days" when "Moorswhine" was published had such an item appeared it would have been laughed at by all concerned. It's a sad day when employees can't have a dig at their senior management. But perhaps @Lineisclear and his colleagues in the ivory tower weren't around in those days? It should perhaps also be remembered that the revolution referred to in an earlier post by @Sawdust took place around that time, so the expressions of discontent apparent in those copies of "Moorswhine" were indicative of the general swell of opinion, and so perhaps this latest episode should be seen as a sighting shot in a much greater war to come?