Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Toaiseach intervenes in Brooks debacle.

1…89111314…21

Comments

  • #302
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Valmont wrote: »
    Preferably something from a peer-reviewed, high impact-factor journal, please.

    Or something from a newspaper that doesn't have a record for this type of 'journalism'.


  • #303
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    But the objections are only PART of the city managers decision. I think the fact that 80,000 people would be trying to access that area during rush hour on a Monday and Tuesday effectively causing gridlock for MANY thousands of commuters would have had more bearing on it tbh.


  • #304
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #305
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Fine but you are saying that the DCC should look at the licencing applications again because of these ALLEGATIONS.


  • #306
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #307
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #308
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    FYP :rolleyes:


  • #309
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #310
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    "up to" 40% "possible" forgeries. "said a source".
    Case proven! LOL.


  • #311
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jim Rockford wrote: »
    She's higher up than that. Lets see how you learn to respect authority when the 5 concerts are given the all clear this week.

    Looking back over Jim's 'contributions' to this thread, I think an immediate 3-day ban is warranted.

    moderately,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • #312
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,694 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    bumper234 wrote: »
    And if some were forged (40%?) does that mean the other 60% from legitimate people should be binned?

    Nope, but it does show that DCC did not exactly excel at its job of verifying the objections before granting the license. If the figure of 40% for forgeries is correct then it does demonstrate the probability that a small section of the local community are in disagreement with the wider community - and they feel the need to resort to illegal forgeries of signatures to support their concerns.
    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    "up to" 40% "possible" forgeries. "said a source".
    Case proven! LOL.

    DCC would not call in the Gardai for no reason, and the Gardai would not launch a criminal investigation for no reason.


  • #313
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    Nope, but it does show that DCC did not exactly excel at its job of verifying the objections before granting the license.


    So DCC should have gone over EVERY objection in minute detail and contacted EVERYONE on the objection forms? And how long do you think that little project would have taken? A week? A month? 6 months?


  • #314
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,694 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    bumper234 wrote: »
    So DCC should have gone over EVERY objection in minute detail and contacted EVERYONE on the objection forms? And how long do you think that little project would have taken? A week? A month? 6 months?

    EVERY objection you shout out!!!

    There were only 400 objections, you make it seem as if there were half a million.

    I don't think it would have been a huge ask to follow up with a quick call back to verify if the objector was aware that a complaint had been made in their name. It is a concert that will bring over 400,000 people to Dublin afterall. They didn't need to go over them in 'minute detail' (where did I suggest that?). Even a decent sample size would have been sufficient to ensure that certain individuals were not up to old tricks again. It is not as if this is the first time this has happened.


  • #315
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    Nope, but it does show that DCC did not exactly excel at its job of verifying the objections before granting the license. If the figure of 40% for forgeries is correct then it does demonstrate the probability that a small section of the local community are in disagreement with the wider community - and they feel the need to resort to illegal forgeries of signatures to support their concerns.

    You are assuming a lot there.
    DCC discovered the forgeries and have afaics a verification process (the answer back system)
    The Gardai would have to separately verify that these where forgeries, hence contacting people again..
    You are also assuming the motive for any attempt to decieve...could just as easily be somebody attempting to discredit objectors, knowing that they would be discovered.


    DCC would not call in the Gardai for no reason, and the Gardai would not launch a criminal investigation for no reason.
    Once called in the Gardai would have no choice but to launch an investigation.


  • #316
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,694 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You are assuming a lot there

    .....

    could just as easily be somebody attempting to discredit objectors, knowing that they would be discovered.

    In fairness, so are you ...

    Its not as black and white as many make it out to be anyway. The community is very divided on this issue and has been for years. Yes it is important to respect those that have made complaints. But there is a need to respect those that wanted the concerts to proceed too. I still think the licensing system needs to be examined.


  • #317
    circadian
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,584 ✭✭✭circadian


    Let's say it takes 10 minutes to make the call and log any information related to it.

    That's 66.6 hours of work. So about a week and a half of CONSTANT work hours. I'd provision 3-4 weeks for that depending on peoples other duties.


  • #318
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    EVERY objection you shout out!!!

    There were only 400 objections, you make it seem as if there were half a million.

    I don't think it would have been a huge ask to follow up with a quick call back to verify if the objector was aware that a complaint had been made in their name. It is a concert that will bring over 400,000 people to Dublin afterall. They didn't need to go over them in 'minute detail' (where did I suggest that?). Even a decent sample size would have been sufficient to ensure that certain individuals were not up to old tricks again. It is not as if this is the first time this has happened.

    And if someone is away on holiday for a couple of weeks? What if you can't contact some of them do you then just assume that their objection was false? How many employees do you have trawling through the objections and knocking on doors to get this done? Some objections have multiple names on so it's 400 objections but many more actual people.


  • #319
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,694 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    bumper234 wrote: »
    And if someone is away on holiday for a couple of weeks? What if you can't contact some of them do you then just assume that their objection was false? How many employees do you have trawling through the objections and knocking on doors to get this done? Some objections have multiple names on so it's 400 objections but many more actual people.

    Emm its not exactly unprecedented, councils often follow up on complaints to verify their authenticity. Again we are talking about 400 complaints here, not exactly a huge amount to follow up on.

    If the complaints had been filled out with contact numbers (it would take an elaborate operation to fake hundreds of contact numbers) then it would be much easier to contact and verify those that made a complaint. That wouldn't suit the forgers though, makes it too difficult for them to get away with it.

    It would probably take a couple of council employees a day to follow up on a decent sample size to see if there is something strange going on. If the 40% forgery figure is accurate then you would know something strange is up immediately. Not that much of a cost when you take into account that the concerts would bring €50 million to the economy.


  • #320
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    Emm its not exactly unprecedented, councils often follow up on complaints to verify their authenticity.

    If the complaints had been filled out with contact numbers (it would take an elaborate operation to fake hundreds of contact numbers) then it would be much easier to contact and verify those that made a complaint. That wouldn't suit the forgers though, makes it too difficult for them to get away with it.

    It would probably take a couple council employees a day to follow up on a decent sample size to see if there is something strange going on. If the 40% forgery figure is accurate then you would know something strange is up immediately. Not that much of a cost when you take into account that the concerts would bring €50 million to the economy.

    Am sure this will be bought up when they review planning/licence applications once this GB debacle is over and done with. In the meantime it still stands hat 5 concerts won't go ahead and GB could still play to 240,000 if he wants to.


  • #321
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    In fairness, so are you ...

    Its not as black and white as many make it out to be anyway. The community is very divided on this issue and has been for years. Yes it is important to respect those that have made complaints. But there is a need to respect those that wanted the concerts to proceed too. I still think the licensing system needs to be examined.

    I'm open minded about it until somebody in the Gardai comments on it.

    For instance, if the last sentence here has any basis in reality...wouldn't the existence of forgeries then have been very handy and fortunate for Aiken.
    Promoter Peter Aiken is attempting to convince Dublin City officials the revelations surrounding the objections should pave the way for a review on the decision to block the five concerts.
    http://www.irishmirror.ie/whats-on/music-nightlife-news/garth-brooks-croke-park-concerts-3850372

    Not claiming for a minute that is what happened, just saying they could have come from anyone.


  • Advertisement
  • #322
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #323
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    The forgeries where found...the system worked. :rolleyes:


  • #324
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    As we now know the planning/licencing process is flawed and needs to be fixed. Does not mean these five concerts should all go ahead.


  • #325
    Sierra Oscar
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,694 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sierra Oscar


    bumper234 wrote: »
    Am sure this will be bought up when they review planning/licence applications once this GB debacle is over and done with. In the meantime it still stands hat 5 concerts won't go ahead and GB could still play to 240,000 if he wants to.

    At this stage Brooks should just play the three. I don't buy into his 'ah shucks I don't wanna disappoint' argument considering it is out of his hands.

    But I still think there should be an appeals process instead of having to go back to the drawing board every time complaints are made, especially considering both sides of the debate around Croker have used dirty tactics to try and win out in the past.


  • #326
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #327
    gandalf
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    So Permabear how many valid qbjections does it take for DCC to use as a reason to help make a decision like this? 1, 10, 50, or 100? Or is it the quality of the submission. My understanding is that one submission properly argued is enough to make a decision on. IF the reports are correct about the false objections then there are still in the region of 250 valid objections to be considered as well as factors such as shutting down an area that is a major artery of traffic from the Northside into the city centre on three weeknights especially Tuesday which tends to be the day of heaviest traffic in the city.

    It seems to be that DCC were more than generous offering 3 of the 5 nights and then when the toys were thrown out of the pram By GB in offering other solutions.


  • #328
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #329
    bumper234
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,250 ✭✭✭✭bumper234


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.


    You have a link to this evidence?


  • #330
    raymon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,774 ✭✭✭raymon


    Sierra Oscar wrote: »
    At this stage Brooks should just play the three. I don't buy into his 'ah shucks I don't wanna disappoint' argument considering it is out of his hands.

    But I still think there should be an appeals process instead of having to go back to the drawing board every time complaints are made, especially considering both sides of the debate around Croker have used dirty tactics to try and win out in the past.

    That makes sense .

    It does go against your party's strategy with Timmy's "political interference " bill.


  • Advertisement
  • #331
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


Advertisement