Choral Fall-out

[french frank]

Sorry to take issue with you ff,

Not at all!

but if DracoM does not have direct personal knowledge of that of which he speaks, then it is hearsay, however reliable his source might be.

Direct personal knowledge would include information from a person or persons involved.

This may be the gravamen of your second para.

Well, discussions which descend to 'Tis-'tisn't-'tis-'tisn't are best abandoned, I think.

I sense certain undercurrents of hostility which keep surfacing in different contexts. If people have any problems I would really prefer them to be referred to me. Et voilà tout!

[decantor]

As an outside observer of recent comments in this thread, I am surprised most by the implicit assumption that "falling out with the BBC" is somehow a slur on Dr Nicholas. I would have expected it to make him a hero. As for the BBC - well, check out the current SoP thread....... or vast tracts of this whole forum!

[underthecountertenor]

ff: I'm afraid not. Direct personal knowledge involves actually witnessing the event in question. Recounting what someone who was present tells you is hearsay. And recounting what someone says they were told by someone who was there is double hearsay. Etc. With all the attendant Chinese whispers risks that that entails.

[Gabriel Jackson]

ff: I'm afraid not. Direct personal knowledge involves actually witnessing the event in question. Recounting what someone who was present tells you is hearsay. And recounting what someone says they were told by someone who was there is double hearsay. Etc. With all the attendant Chinese whispers risks that that entails.

In any case, in this instance the "falling out" cannot have been witnessed by anyone, nor can it have been recounted by a participant because, as has been conceded, it didn't happen.

[french frank]

Well, my feeling is that decantor had it right.

As an outside observer of recent comments in this thread, I am surprised most by the implicit assumption that "falling out with the BBC" is somehow a slur

But then I spend my entire life at odds with the BBC. They are at least 99% wrong all the time.

[orbis factor]

ff: I'm afraid not. Direct personal knowledge involves actually witnessing the event in question. Recounting what someone who was present tells you is hearsay. And recounting what someone says they were told by someone who was there is double hearsay. Etc. With all the attendant Chinese whispers risks that that entails.

Yep. Extraordinary that this needs to be pointed out!

[french frank]

Yep. Extraordinary that this needs to be pointed out!

Well, some of us clearly ARE extraordinarily thick. Now shut up, please. You've gnawed all the meat off the bone. Or as the saying goes, Move along, nothing to see here.

[orbis factor]

[QUOTE=french frank;161049]Well, some of us clearly ARE extraordinarily thick. Now shut up, please. You've gnawed all the meat off the bone. Or as the saying goes, Move along, nothing to see here.[/

So pleased my point has hit home!

[french frank]

So pleased my point has hit home!

Clearly the appreciation of irony is not your strong point.

I'm gaining the impression that if DracoM expressed the view that the floor hadn't been swept in Westminster Abbey last Tuesday fortnight you would deny it or insist he provided incontrovertible proof.

You may have the final word before I close this thread.

[underthecountertenor]

Clearly the appreciation of irony is not your strong point.

I'm gaining the impression that if DracoM expressed the view that the floor hadn't been swept in Westminster Abbey last Tuesday fortnight you would deny it or insist he provided incontrovertible proof.

You may have the final word before I close this thread.

I think I too must have forgotten the meaning of irony, as all I could discern in your previous post was a degree of passive aggression, I'm afraid. I have tried to point out to you, politely, that orbis factor's reference to hearsay was perfectly valid, and that hearsay has its dangers, particularly when it is used in an attempt to justify what orbis factor rightly describes as tittle-tattle, or in other words casually dropped stories about named individuals. A kind of amateur tabloid journalism. Gabriel has made the point that the story in question is unfounded. Yet, when faced with this, you have actually sought to justify DracoM's behaviour by reference to an absurdly unapt purported analogy. If DracoM were to visit Westminster Abbey and witness a speck of mud on the floor, there would be no reason why he shouldn't tell us all about it, on the offchance that we might be interested.But in this case he has chosen to make a casual and (perhaps thankfully) unparticularised allegation about a well-known church musician's relations with the BBC, on a public forum, on the basis of hearsay. I'm sorry, but it seems to me that, whilst sniping at orbis factor, you are failing to acknowledge some uncomfortable truths which (s)he is highlighting about one or two of your regular contributors. But no doubt I in turn will be accused, not for the first time here, of being a troll who should be ignored.

[french frank]

I think I too must have forgotten the meaning of irony

I have outlined my view in a Private Message.