Does Norman have some valid points.

Discussion in 'Diamond Lil's' started by slim, Oct 19, 2007.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Well Gary or Norman as we know him has been put under stoppage again, no doubt he will be back in yet another persona very soon. Though he pisses many off with his postings he does normally get a great many responses to them. Also are we missing postings from him which are relevant just because most of his postings are pure rubbish.
    I believe that he has a valid point when complaining that the RN in it's current state has too many senior officers and Lt Cmdr's, many who seem to be holding positions which could be carried out more cheaply by civilians. Perhaps the savings could be used to recruit more sailors.
    He also highlighted the high payments made to some charity senior executives, something I hadn't thought of, but having looked I tend to agree with him.
    So Norman, is he All bad or is there some good in him?
  2. chieftiff

    chieftiff War Hero Moderator

    Slim, I don't think he is all bad to be honest and the Charity Pay point was interesting, shame he had to hijack someone else's thread.

    I do get a bit pee'd off with his anti RN Officer rant though, it has been done to death, several times (as he well knows) and his "sailors are fat thread" was way off the mark!
  3. I must admit that sometimes this site looks as though it has just been decorated with a bucket of bland by the look of the threads, so maybe someone that comes on here an chucks a bath full of nause around every now and then isn't such a bad thing.
    I also happen to agree with his stance on RN Officers :)
  4. If Norman did not post then RumRation would have no posts, or very few and not worth the reading
    Nothing like a good rant,to have the messdeck chatting

    His stance on officers, is correct, Why should we have an Admiral of Sweet FA, and a Rear Admiral of nothingness.
    Kick them out, as they would if we had sixty CIS operators and only two ships
    If a bus company had twenty inspectors thirty drivers and was now down to two busses, do you think they would keep them all employed
    I don't think so

    RN needs to slim down not just with the RNFT, and distribute any savings throughout the fleet
  5. Short and sweet.......yes he does.
    Annoying, occasionally arrogant and opinionated, but.....
  6. It is annoying to have him (Her/it) popping up, but he occasionally makes me laugh and it is fun catching him as he uses the same tired arguments and phrases.
    As previously mentioned his initial posts sometimes hurtle totally off thread and become quite interesting, I'd think that truly grips his sh!t.
  7. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    As one who engages Norman in his word games, I find him to be like a sore tooth; you know you shouldn't do it, but you can't help poking it now and again... but he is stimulating, and usually for the wrong reasons.

    However, I do think that he has taken the joke too far - I reckon he should just return as "Norman" and keep the same name. The most frustrating thing about his pseudonyms is that his threads are now becoming formulaic:

    "Norman: A Guide"
    1. Ask a seemingly innocent question to reel people in.
    2. Question is answered but he claims not to know such new, modern Naval phrases such as RNFT, etc.
    3. Throws in a few vague references to too many senior officers in the RN.
    4. Continues in the same vein, claiming matelots today are not a reflection of the ones "in his day".
    5. Claims to know a man who knew someone who once spoke to a bloke in a bar, that things today are [enter pointless jibe], then sit back and watch the same (originally) helpful people bite.
    6. When someone disagrees with him he starts talking like Douglas Fairbanks Jr. in a poor '30s pirate movie ("Ah-ha, thrust and parry, my dear fellow... you claim to speak like a gentleman but you are nothing but a swashbuckling swine. Avast, you rapscallion!")
    7. Those who have twigged who he is start to mis-spell his current nickname to include the name "Norman".
    8. Gets a warning from Seadog.
    9. Continues in similar vein, ad nauseum...
    10. Gets another warning from Seadog and other Mods.
    11. Receives more helpful advice from unsuspecting contributors.
    12. Gives corroborative evidence that he is, in fact, Norman.
    13. Sniggers like a naughty schoolboy.
    14. Gets banned by Mods.

    If he stopped playing this juvenile game then I think his contribution to the site will be recognised; it's not necessarily the content of his posts that wind people up, but the manner in which he thinks we haven't heard it all before.
  8. Norman does raise some valid points, however, I think Norman gets exactly what he wants.

    I believe he comes in with the aim to get a bite and to see how long it takes to ban him, this may not be the reason he originally joined RR, but after he was first banned he seems to have made a game out of it. I just wish he would let the rest of us in on the rules.
  9. Having not been involved in many of his posts, it does appear that some points he has made do hit the nerve of some.

    I can CONFIRM that there are many Snr and Jnr Rates who cannot pass the RNFT and probably will not either.

    Also the point about the amount of Officers is also true, the RN is currently an inverted triangle with the junior ranks being far out numbered in respect to jobs than the senior ones, not just Officers. This also includes the amount of WO1 jobs (especially Warfare) that could be done by a good CPO or WO2.

    If his posts have been derogative then fair enough.

    But do not start to censure us because you do not like what we post or that you want to tow the party line that we are fed all the time.
  10. Evidence, there is a thing that no matter what anyone posts will always be hard to be accepted or rejected depending on the readers own thoughts.

    All I can say is that I am fully aware in a recent job I was in a lot of people had not passed the RNFT. There are of course far far more in numbers that have and will still continue to pass.

    But they are the ones that do not stick out when they walk around, it is the others that are visible because of their stature, this includes all ranks.

    As for the other point, how many Lt Cdr and Cdr do we employ and how many actual jobs at sea( we are in the Navy by the way) are there.

    Hence the inverted triangle ashore. at sea never many gapped Officers jobs, but plenty others that are.

    Eveidence is hard to provide, these are my views from what I can see today.

    I am fully aware that there are only 7000 officers against 31000 other ranks at this moment in time.

    So yes the actual inverted triangle statement is wrong.

    I stick to the statement that there are many jobs that we have that could be done equally by someone of a lower rank/rating just as well or even better.
  11. I was editing my last post and had not completed before you replied.

    I admit the Inverted Triangle atatement is incorrect, 31000 against 7000.

    It appears we have similar views on the structure we currently have, that may be it could be tuned better in both aspects.

    I also agree in all walks of life you will have the fit and the not so fit. This I do not disagree with.

    I have also said that there are probably too many WO1 Jobs that could also be filled by junior ranks just as well, I have not specifically been singling out Officers.

    We may have similar thoughts and maybe I should have not made such a glib statement.

    The 2 1/2's however does sometimes anger me, we have many who by the time they join a ship as a HOD have not been to sea for 8-10 years, and when they did it was for 18 months. This is no fault of there own, it is the system.

    You have been unfortunate in your short notice appointments

    We could go on for a long time, but let us end now.

    Thank you for your replies.

    The original statement I made was for us not to be censured if we put forward our views, I agree they need to have substance and not just one off statements.

    But do not let us be made to tow the party line and that there is never anything wrong.
  12. Norman appears to touch a raw nerve in some quarters but talks a lot of sense in others. Do you think that however disparaging it might be to today's Defence Ministers and Officers of Flag Rank it should not be censored by MOD's with an over-inflated opinion of his or her's worth? Anything smacking of Libel attacking a person's character for the sake of it, or being gratuitously offensive Get rid of it but pointing out we are overburdened with Lt Cmds wuithout a hope in hell of ever serving in that rank at sea Should that be Zapped?
  13. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Bowline (or are you Norman?!): It's not so much his (somewhat repetitive) points of view that wind people up (in fact it seems he makes many valid posts as shown by the previous comments), but the way he does not enter into a debate about the subject matter; he posts, then crawls back under his shell to watch the resulting maelstrom, tittering into his hand. If he wants to provoke a discussion then he should at least contribute accordingly, to substantiate his claims.
  14. Crawling back into his shell tittering?Perhaps he has found it difficult to pursue a contentious reasoned argument as he gets removed for reasons best known to the self-apponted Moderators strange logic Clearly the personal self-interest ,raw-nerves of the Moderators are being offended not the fundamental raison-detre of the premise; clearly that reains inviolate,
  15. wet_blobby

    wet_blobby War Hero Moderator

    Bowline, admit it, you are Norman.
  16. Who the fkcuk is Nor (I,ve just forgotten his name) Who the fukc is he anyway
  17. " At the end of the day" We kneel and pray "should we be arguing to cut our tax bill ,however small, by cutting our losses and sacking two thirds of our Lt Cmd establishment
  18. To achieve what end? Pay them redundancy packages that cost almost as much as the pensions and wages we've saved? What does sacking 2/3 of all our shore-based Lt Cdrs achieve? For a start most training would grind to a halt (both shore- and sea-based training) as would most procurement activity. Is that what you want?

    PS Your one line comments like the one above are the reason you keep getting banned. You come in with the same comments everytime and when someone says anything in debate against you, you come out with a pathetic one line that adds nothing to the debate other than to show your true identity. If you are going to try multiple user names at least try multiple personalities so we might at least it might be more difficult for us to work out who you are.[/quote] So why are we promoting so many? All Lts leave, as 2 and a halfs No one leaves on pension with less than a 2 and a halfs pension. Those who sadly had not progressed beyond that point are upgraded to Hon Cmds in order to receive an up-graded pension Does this make sense to you? It certainly does not to me. Pathetic? Just who can he be referring to?
  19. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Normline: I rest my case... :roll:

    Once again you back yourself into a corner but fail to substantiate your argument, or at least try to get us to empahise with your POV. If you merely explained what the catalyst of your greivance is, then we might be able to see where you're coming from...

    Failing that, can I suggest that you don your 'sailor suit' and disappear over to ARRSE? They might bite a lot easier than we do on RR... :yawnstretch:
  20. What's Wet blobby?
    Sounds like something most of the ship's company suffered from after a run ashore in Kure. Mist pot cit dispensed in a chained enamel mug outside the sick bay would stop the burning sensation on micturation (sp?) until the stoppage of leave and rum did that anyway. Who remembers NSU?

Share This Page