PiqueABoo Posted October 10, 2012 Posted October 10, 2012 "A BBC insider said there was no proof that bosses had never lent on anyone to drop the Newsnight report."
X-13 Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Yeah, and? Unless someone was stupid enough to keep an e-mail or memo, then there IS no proof they threw their weight around.
localzuk Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Double Negative. Ah well, they're still not as bad as Microsoft - I've seen triple and more negatives in GPO rules...
X-13 Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Ah well, they're still not as bad as Microsoft - I've seen triple and more negatives in GPO rules... I've seen a triple negative in a licence agreement before. It took people a while to understand what they were allowed to do with it.
chazzy2501 Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Microsoft Pffft, you should see the magic info software on my Samsung Screens. It's like a MS GPO that has then been poorly translated from Korean.
jinnantonnixx Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 Double Negative. I couldn't fail to disagree with you less.
Gatt Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 "A BBC insider said there was no proof that bosses had never lent on anyone to drop the Newsnight report." Typo perhaps? "A BBC insider said there was no proof that bosses had ever lent on anyone to drop the Newsnight report."
Garacesh Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 No, you see, he was giving up making people drop reports for 40 days.
X-13 Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 No, you see, he was giving up making people drop reports for 40 days. Here was me thinking it was a language fail along the lines of "can you borrow me ___?"
PiqueABoo Posted October 11, 2012 Author Posted October 11, 2012 Typo perhaps? I did wonder about that, but would they invent an insider to *support* the BBC? If not then we have an implicit suggestion that if the BBC manglement were innocent of suppressing burning truth, there would be some meeting minutes in some filing cabinet somewhere detailing everything they hadn't done i.e. it's crocky unfair burden (of proof) territory.
Gatt Posted October 11, 2012 Posted October 11, 2012 I did wonder about that, but would they invent an insider to *support* the BBC? If not then we have an implicit suggestion that if the BBC manglement were innocent of suppressing burning truth, there would be some meeting minutes in some filing cabinet somewhere detailing everything they hadn't done i.e. it's crocky unfair burden (of proof) territory. It's probably locked away in Room 101...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now