TonyR wrote:Psamathe wrote:TonyR wrote:...
Yes, we all know that and it has been covered in February's Cycle. So you said that "was more misleading than saying what was actually done" So pray tell us what was actually done that was not covered in Cycle. And the couple of others that nobody seems bothered enough about to even know their names? What of them?
You should really be asking the CTC about all this, rather than me. Ok, they are not too keen on telling people, but I ca't go on talking for them despite their silence. e.g. my copy of cycle did not say CJ had been made redundant. But start asking the CTC to explain rather than me (please). Oh, they don't respond to e-mails (which makes asking them that little bit harder).
Ian
No, I'm asking you. You made the accusation that what was said was different from what was actually done. So I'm asking you, since I assume you were not fabricating the accusation, what you know that is different from what the CTC has said - which was demand had fallen to such an extent that three staff were made redundant and the savings made used to better support more popular activities. So tell us what you know that allowed you to make that statement in good faith.
Sorry but I've better things to do than "take your test". I read the Feb Cycle Magazine. I've read what one person made redundant said on this forum. You can read them to. But I don't justify my comments to you and not through a sequence of questions making out you want to know something when yo are actually trying to test me. That is just deceptive and I'm too busy for your games.
Ian