Thanks mod team!

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:Wait, Photek is a draftsman at Dublin Airport? I thought he drew pictures of buildings?

I used to with a construction firm, then an architectural one, brief stint for telecom company working on green field sites for masts and now I work for Dublin Airport drawing runways and flight manuals for pilots and the like.

TimeGhost wrote:

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:Wait, Photek is a draftsman at Dublin Airport? I thought he drew pictures of buildings?

I used to with a construction firm, then an architectural one, brief stint for telecom company working on green field sites for masts and now I work for Dublin Airport drawing runways and flight manuals for pilots and the like.

If you have any issues with this flight manual, kindly eject yourself.

Kanbei wrote:Just to clear a few things up (Puts my Law Graduate hat on ) ;

Section 29 of the Data Protection Act states that

1)Personal data processed for any of the following purposes—
(a)the prevention or detection of crime,
(b)the apprehension or prosecution of offenders, or
(c)the assessment or collection of any tax or duty or of any imposition of a similar nature,
are exempt from the first data protection principle (except to the extent to which it requires compliance with the conditions in Schedules 2 and 3) and section 7 in any case to the extent to which the application of those provisions to the data would be likely to prejudice any of the matters mentioned in this subsection.

Section 55;

(1)A person must not knowingly or recklessly, without the consent of the data controller—
(a)obtain or disclose personal data or the information contained in personal data, or
(b)procure the disclosure to another person of the information contained in personal data.
(2)Subsection (1) does not apply to a person who shows—
(a)that the obtaining, disclosing or procuring—
(i)was necessary for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime, or
(ii)was required or authorised by or under any enactment, by any rule of law or by the order of a court,
(b)that he acted in the reasonable belief that he had in law the right to obtain or disclose the data or information or, as the case may be, to procure the disclosure of the information to the other person,
(c)that he acted in the reasonable belief that he would have had the consent of the data controller if the data controller had known of the obtaining, disclosing or procuring and the circumstances of it, or
(d)that in the particular circumstances the obtaining, disclosing or procuring was justified as being in the public interest.
(3)A person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence.

So basically Nood/Wiggles/Goat ARE guilty of a crime, but Karl isn't as he was trying to detect it.

Hopefully Atreyu doesn't find any fault with my logic

Igor wrote:So, would they have got away with it if they'd either deleted all their PMs before acting on their plan, or simply emailed each other instead of communicating on here? Were the PMs KP found the only evidence that proved it was them?

Mafro wrote:

Photek wrote:I don't think anyone knows im a Draftsman for Dubin Airport.

I knew that.

Atreyu wrote:

The GR big book of children's stories wrote:Once upon a time there was a big house where lots of children lived. The house had lots of colouring-books, which the children would play with. Sometimes the children would send each other letters if they wanted to say something that they didn't want everyone else to hear.

One night three bad children broke into the house. They were very naughty. They put rude pictures in the colouring-books. They tried to blame the some of the good children by pretending to send letters that made it look like the good children had been naughty instead! You wouldn't be that naughty, would you?

Next morning there was a big mess. So two of the cleverest children, Karl and Mr Gecko, closed the doors to the house and worked all day to make everything better again. They cleaned up the colouring-books. In order to find out who the bad children were, though, they had to read some of the letters that the bad children had sent. They wouldn't normally do this, but it was very important that they found out who the bad children were.

After working all day they opened up the house again. The bad children were sent away from the house and will have to work in a zoo cleaning up the plop plops in the monkey enclosure. That's what happens to bad children, isn't it?

When the bad children were gone, one of the good children asked Karl and Mr Gecko whether they would open up anyone else's mail. The good children had always thought their letters were secret. Karl and Mr Gecko said that if the bad children came back then they might have to open other children's letters again, but it wasn't something that they felt they ought to do normally, so the good children could send letters again as they'd done before.

All the good children were very happy that the problems were over, apart from little Photek, who had stuck two pencils up his nostrils. Everyone laughed. "That's our little Photek!" they said, and then they all went for a drive-thru.

The end.

Frank wrote:

Mafro wrote:

Photek wrote:I don't think anyone knows im a Draftsman for Dubin Airport.

I knew that.

That

Well, I knew you were in CAD, anyway.

PES Fan wrote:Personally they won't be missed.

Zellery wrote:I like admitting things just fine.

They won't be missed.

Moggy wrote:Wait, Photek is a draftsman at Dublin Airport? I thought he drew pictures of buildings?

glowy69 wrote:Nood really is a banana split isn't he. I hope nobody has the misfortune to know him in real life

Wiggles just seems a passenger but is clearly implicated, and goat knew what he was doing

Nood can get into Mocky's emails using the Crisp method.

We were going to ban tnman and unban you at the same time, we were just waiting to get in contact with you because we thought it would be better if you started posting the second it happened. We went into a lot of detail about this yesterday, and tbh i'm a bit pissed off you're being unbanned

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:Wait, Photek is a draftsman at Dublin Airport? I thought he drew pictures of buildings?

I used to with a construction firm, then an architectural one, brief stint for telecom company working on green field sites for masts and now I work for Dublin Airport drawing runways and flight manuals for pilots and the like.

Peter Crisp wrote:

Photek wrote:

Moggy wrote:Wait, Photek is a draftsman at Dublin Airport? I thought he drew pictures of buildings?

I used to with a construction firm, then an architectural one, brief stint for telecom company working on green field sites for masts and now I work for Dublin Airport drawing runways and flight manuals for pilots and the like.

This may be a stupid question but doesn't the airport just have a couple of runways so how many drawings would you need unless they all ask for weird stylistic flourishes and the runway painted pink or something else bizarre. Also surely the flight manual just says land on runway 1 and park here after using taxiway 3 and please try and avoid crashing into stuff.

Dual wrote:Peter Crisp shitting on the entire civil engineering industry in one post.