• 29 Posts
  • 2.62K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 9th, 2023

help-circle


  • My point was that good policies can be interpreted poorly.

    The company has people it KNOWS are first aid trained and they were trained recently. Letting someone who claims to know take precedence over someone who definitely does would be bad policy, switching out for someone who is documented as trained asap is good policy. First aiders need to sign waivers and forms saying they accept the risks and responsibilities, which limits the liability of the company if Bob doesnt make it or Bob had hepatitis. Standard corporate BS but sensible policy.

    Some idiot interprets the policy poorly as “have the person relived by first aiders only” and refuses to let anyone else help.


  • Its definitely liability related but my point was that good policies can be interpreted poorly.

    The company has people it KNOWS are first aid trained and they were trained recently. Letting someone who claims to know take precedence over someone who definitely does would be bad policy, switching out for someone who is documented as trained asap is good policy. First aiders need to sign waivers and forms saying they accept the risks and responsibilities, which limits the liability of the company if Bob doesnt make it or Bob had hepatitis. Standard corporate BS but sensible policy.

    Some idiot interprets the policy poorly, reads it as “have the person relived by first aiders only” and refuses to let anyone else help.



  • My workplace has a similar rule about CPR or medical emergencies. It has to be supervisors or the official first aid team members IF POSSIBLE. 1. Because we know all of the first aid training for those people is current. 2. Its traumatising for people to perform CPR especially if its ineffective. And we are to encourage staff to return to their duties or at very least advise staff to clear the area and give them some privacy because if you arent actively helping (Which this person was) you’re just gawking and you need to fuck off.

    Could very well be common sense rules that have been misinterpreted by an idiot.


  • Its very much the same as standup comedy. Its 100% you.

    If people dont watch its because YOU arent entertaining enough, YOU arent likeable enough, YOU arent putting in enough effort and energy, YOU dont bring anything new to the table, YOU dont take enough risks… Theres no team, theres no band, theres no coworkers, its all on you. Thats a lot to hang your entire livelihood on.

    I could only do streaming or a YT if I had “never work again” money because without the pressure I probably could be fun and entertaining the whole time.




  • I think Ricky has a problem in that some people go to his shows expecting a sterility of humor you find on tv and get proper standup. You almost never hear outrage about Jeselnik because his entire repertoire is “I’m saying the wildest shit I can think of and thats what you’re here for”

    I have mixed feelings about Dave Chappelle because I genuinely believe in inclusivity which unfortunately includes having jokes made about you (which some communities do not appreciate) but he just did too much and it crossed a line into feeling like bullying behavior so I dont fuck with him at all anymore.



  • But thats just it and what most professional comedians are talking about. They dont want you to be genuinely offended or upset, but if you go to a comedy show or watch a 60 minute special. You laugh at 55 minutes but get offended at the 5 that are about a topic YOU are sensitive about, that 5 minutes wasnt all of a sudden serious statements meant to be taken seriously. It was all jokes. They dont owe anyone an apology because that person didnt like parts of their work. They KNOW that not everything is going to land for everyone. If 90% of the audience are laughing, you are killing it.