A Tyrant Named Miltiades! Don't forget to swipe right
#871

....... said:
Youve got it backwards.

Rachel HAD to become the rising star because Tim was caught out. The Garda investigation on his activities was going on long before the media was reporting on it. When the Allens knew the game was up with Tim they moved to push Rachel into prime position because they knew Darina would stay with him and thus be no good to them for tv etc for some time. So Rachel was on the up and up before we all knew about Tim, but not before the Allens did.


Why do people refer to strangers by their first names?

You'd swear some people were describing the plot to some daytime soap-opera. I'm not sure what inspires such apparent infatuation with this family.

aroundthehouse Registered User
#872

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Why do people refer to strangers by their first names?

You'd swear some people were describing the plot to some daytime soap-opera. I'm not sure what inspires such apparent infatuation with this family.


because their lives are like a soap opera, they attempt to portray this wholesome cooking family from the countryside just to make money whilst behind the scenes they are far from that

4 people have thanked this post
The Crowman Registered User
#873

tayto lover said:
Loads of posters have suggested that Tim took the blame for a younger family member. It might be true but it could also suggest a cunning plot to save him from family expulsion while still protecting the guilty party.
I for one am not buying that unless someone can relay a convincing story.


The man is a horrible creep, just listening to his voice on that YT video of him posted further back is enough me of his guilt

2 people have thanked this post
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! Don't forget to swipe right
#874

aroundthehouse said:
because their lives are like a soap opera, they attempt to portray this wholesome cooking family from the countryside just to make money whilst behind the scenes they are far from that

Isn't it all a bit nasty, though?

Imagine your Mum or your sister cooked buns for a living, and maybe did so on the telly.

Is that really a carte blanche for people to idly gossip about the innermost workings of your mind, impute all sorts of malevolent/ sinister motives to you, and talk about you as if they knew the first thing about you?

I don't think so. Most people are decent people at their core, including people contributing to this thread, probably. And i really don't see why they sometimes feel they can say what they want, in public, about total strangers.

3 people have thanked this post
aroundthehouse Registered User
#875

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Isn't it all a bit nasty, though?

Imagine your Mum or your sister cooked buns for a living, and maybe did so on the telly.

Is that really a carte blanche for people to idly gossip about the innermost workings of your mind, impute all sorts of malevolent/ sinister motives to you, and talk about you as if they knew the first thing about you?

I don't think so. Most people are decent people at their core, including people contributing to this thread, probably. And i really don't see why they sometimes feel they can say what they want, in public, about total strangers.


because they put themselves out there in the public domain to make as much money as they can from auld ones buying their rehashed cook books, anybody willing to do that must take the good with the bad and if you are in the public eye you just wont get away with hoarding kiddie porn or peddling drugs.... its not like rachel goes on tv to bake a few buns for the love of baking....its to make as much money as they possibly can

2 people have thanked this post
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! Don't forget to swipe right
#876

aroundthehouse said:
its to make as much money as they possibly can

Who cares? it's called making a living. We all try to make as much money as we can.

Fine, i'm only making a suggestion. Go back to the curtain-twitching and overly-personal accusations then.

1 person has thanked this post
Grayson Registered User
#877

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Isn't it all a bit nasty, though?

Imagine your Mum or your sister cooked buns for a living, and maybe did so on the telly.

Is that really a carte blanche for people to idly gossip about the innermost workings of your mind, impute all sorts of malevolent/ sinister motives to you, and talk about you as if they knew the first thing about you?

I don't think so. Most people are decent people at their core, including people contributing to this thread, probably. And i really don't see why they sometimes feel they can say what they want, in public, about total strangers.


To be fair that's a debate about celebrity itself. I don't think it really matters if they're making buns or are a politician, they're in the public eye. there is a discussion about how much intrusion is allowed. Is it ok to report on a celebrity wedding, or on their crimes? Does it matter how much they put themselves out there, for example if it was a reality TV personality who's constantly trying to get themselves in a gossip magazine, is it different to a celebrity chef who just turns up for work?
I think celebrity gossip is really the lowest form of news, if it can even be called that. That however doesn't mean that it's unethical to report it.

aroundthehouse Registered User
#878

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Who cares? it's called making a living. We all try to make as much money as we can.

Fine, i'm only making a suggestion. Go back to the curtain-twitching and overly-personal accusations then.


we all try to make as much money as we can but not all of us do it in the public eye and as i have said, if you go into the public domain to make your living you must know that you are open to scrutiny and certainly selling drugs and collecting kiddie porn for people in the public eye, of course people are going to talk about it, two of the worst things anybody could do....all the while rachel is baking buns on the television whilst launching a new cookbook, it doesnt wash

1 person has thanked this post
....... Registered User
#879

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Why do people refer to strangers by their first names?

You'd swear some people were describing the plot to some daytime soap-opera. I'm not sure what inspires such apparent infatuation with this family.


Its shorter than typing "Tim Allen", "Rachel Allen", "Darina Allen" each time.

Would seem a bit odd to be typing out their whole names when the entire readership of boards.ie knows exactly who is being referred to when we refer to Tim in this thread.

2 people have thanked this post
A Tyrant Named Miltiades! Don't forget to swipe right
#880

Grayson said:
To be fair that's a debate about celebrity itself. I don't think it really matters if they're making buns or are a politician, they're in the public eye. there is a discussion about how much intrusion is allowed. Is it ok to report on a celebrity wedding, or on their crimes? Does it matter how much they put themselves out there, for example if it was a reality TV personality who's constantly trying to get themselves in a gossip magazine, is it different to a celebrity chef who just turns up for work?
I think celebrity gossip is really the lowest form of news, if it can even be called that. That however doesn't mean that it's unethical to report it.

Can't disagree with anything you've said, and I happen to think the story about the drug seizure is newsworthy, even the bit about the guy's family connections.

i have no issue at all with how this was reported. All I'm saying is that any ordinary family (and regardless of their fairly comfortable lives, this is just an ordinary family) must be in turmoil right now.

maybe we should have a bit of compassion and a bit of cop-on when discussing people who themselves have done nothing wrong. Do we really need to paint innocent people, running a successful business and trying to get on with their lives, in such a sinister light? What gives anyone the right to do that, isn't that just being a colossal dick?

....... Registered User
#881

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Do we really need to paint innocent people, running a successful business and trying to get on with their lives, in such a sinister light?


If you can tell us how to talk about the supporters of a convicted child pornographer in a in a non sinister light we would all be delighted to hear about it.

5 people have thanked this post
aroundthehouse Registered User
#882

....... said:
If you can tell us how to talk about the supporters of a convicted child pornographer in a in a non sinister light we would all be delighted to hear about it.


here here...

4 people have thanked this post
Grayson Registered User
#883

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! said:
Can't disagree with anything you've said, and I happen to think the story about the drug seizure is newsworthy, even the bit about the guy's family connections.

i have no issue at all with how this was reported. All I'm saying is that any ordinary family (and regardless of their fairly comfortable lives, this is just an ordinary family) must be in turmoil right now.

maybe we should have a bit of compassion and a bit of cop-on when discussing people who themselves have done nothing wrong. Do we really need to paint innocent people, running a successful business and trying to get on with their lives, in such a sinister light? What gives anyone the right to do that, isn't that just being a colossal dick?


I think it's all down to that old phrase "in the public interest". It's very broad though and there's a lot of grey areas.

2 people have thanked this post
thesandeman Registered User
#884

We can't let Cork steal all the limelight:

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!