ACCforum: Just A Small Fracture - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 18 Pages +
  • « First
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Just A Small Fracture well bugger me

#341 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 13 February 2016 - 03:32 PM

View Postgreg, on 12 February 2016 - 04:51 PM, said:

He was quite happy to offer a link to his real name , just like you did.
Stop moaning and just don't post info. you later then claim you did not.


Greg you say I posted something that you are not willing to share with the forum.

The exact detail of the e-mail or conversation is what we want because we are so sick and tired of people who say we did or said things, but they have nothing to prove they are telling the truth!!

Huggy had better come and save your skin for you. Otherwise we will just note you as a liar. And what you write as rubbish.

Mini
0

#342 User is offline   netcoachnz 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3454
  • Joined: 26-January 11

Posted 13 February 2016 - 09:46 PM

View PostMINI, on 13 February 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

Greg you say I posted something that you are not willing to share with the forum.

The exact detail of the e-mail or conversation is what we want because we are so sick and tired of people who say we did or said things, but they have nothing to prove they are telling the truth!!

Huggy had better come and save your skin for you. Otherwise we will just note you as a liar. And what you write as rubbish.

Mini


Do not be too quick to call folk ''liars''. It all started back in 2008, check out this topic

http://accforum.org/...-in-high-court/
1

#343 User is offline   Kewl 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 350
  • Joined: 02-August 15

Posted 14 February 2016 - 01:17 AM

Mini,
you are one of many whom i did help one on one when it was needed in my own way,
what you did not see is the other people behind the effort to help you, i helped you personally as a measure of thanks for what you have done with respect to the information you have offered and done, what you did not see if the after effects of residual injury after helping you because that wasnt the focus at that time. What is muddied the " water" so to speak is the long term inner fighting that has split many people from helping each other ...to ...suspecting who is back stabbing who...
I have never revealed your true name on this forum or any other, never.

With respect to this thread, only because MadMac has by his own volition made the full association to his actual name in this thread , and because i respect him as a person for the good times, and the tough acc times, we have shared is why I have responded to this thread as seen.


I do understand the issue around naming people. There is a paradigm of fear - the fear of your details being made public to threaten or harass or otherwise unstable the emotional state, for younger generations and those in the ....digital coin realm, it is called DOXXing

so what happens when fear is refused to be accepted? The loss of power. So what then?

In the particular post i replied to here was about whether naming people and how much they have received from ACC legitimately, it matters not how much any other claimant has ever been paid legitimately

Redfox:
as a matter of conscious communication it is irrelevant whether there are more than one of you writing your posts., it is evident there is more than one writing style, whether that be more than one person or one person trying to emulate being more than one, there is zero value in exploring that avenue when weighing what value may be obtained in view of the post i have responded to.


When my two previous posts are read as thay are meant to be, it is understood (and as i have since spoken to Gaffa09 and his lovely wife in person yesterday) i care not for any which forum, they are only a communication medium.

to quote redfox:

"Many claimants have no desire to involve themselves creating "a passive or secondary income that will help with daily,weekly,monthly or yearly expenses." Kewl, regardless of whether or not the offer to educate them is made by the ACC to do such a thing.

I know of a number of claimants who gave up waiting for the ACC to retrain them so they could get on with their lives but it seems ACC where content to allow them to stay on ACC and then finally get shafted onto WINZ. That in many ways works out a cheaper option for the WINZ ACC to take, don't you agree?


Reason for edit: Struck out WINZ and included ACC on last line."

well done. Does that now bring spotlight to the education system, whose results , in a simplified way, reflect that success of students memory recall is a percentage of how much their teachers taught? ponder it.
Could that it be the education system has systemically failed to better educate the country on wealth building and preservation and as such the viewpoint you stateremains valid
being :

" Many claimants have no desire to involve themselves creating "a passive or secondary income that will help with daily,weekly,monthly or yearly expenses." Kewl, regardless of whether or not the offer to educate them is made by the ACC to do such a thing.

I know of a number of claimants who gave up waiting for the ACC to retrain them so they could get on with their lives but it seems ACC where content to allow them to stay on ACC and then finally get shafted onto WINZ. That in many ways works out a cheaper option for the WINZ ACC to take, don't you agree?"


Surely that reflects one the decades of claimants claims of file mismanagement and legal recourse (and costs and failure of legal access as represented and agreed at the United Nations over the no fault scheme of full cover, no sue, pet assessors, the exit scheme and the many flavours of acc claim mismanagement that failed to actually deliver tangible results for our communities. You see, read back to the actual content of the post i responded to. My response was toward the naming of actual claimants whom have received entitlements, on the other hand, in the corresponding posts no one has written anything about the cost of bureaucracy failing as it is.

Calculate that.

From the times years ago when related sites such as " the mouse that Roared" revealed a similar insurance scheme of claimant exits and the similarities of complaints of failures to cover injuries and respective entitlements, would you agree it has been a successful social view that claimants are further disenfranchised by inner fighting due to the focus being change from the system failures to actual threats real or perceived towards claimants.?Has that worked?

Are ther any actual figures on how much bureaucracy has cost to prevent the intent of the ACC scheme under the woodhouse principles of the removal of the right to sue for an alleged no fault no sue cover. Of course not, it is muddied by employer ratings et al.
2

#344 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 11:30 AM

View Postgreg, on 12 February 2016 - 04:51 PM, said:

He was quite happy to offer a link to his real name , just like you did.
Stop moaning and just don't post info. you later then claim you did not.


Greg

Where have I offered the document in my own name. Flowers did it!! Read the post of today.

You still have not proved what you are trying to convince me and others of!! That I named myself the same name as is on the case in question.

This is the one that LF used to get my details and wrongly accuse me of being a Tax cheat cause their lawyer or none of them can read the law.

Besides those documents are not made public to name and defame people. They are made public to assist others in not either making the same mistakes, or using as caselaw to make a point. You may only use those documents for the purposes they are made public. So what is your point. You have yet to prove that I have written of myself except in the name of Mini.

MIni
0

#345 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 14 February 2016 - 12:02 PM

View PostKewl, on 14 February 2016 - 01:17 AM, said:

Mini,
you are one of many whom i did help one on one when it was needed in my own way,
what you did not see is the other people behind the effort to help you, i helped you personally as a measure of thanks for what you have done with respect to the information you have offered and done, what you did not see if the after effects of residual injury after helping you because that wasnt the focus at that time. What is muddied the " water" so to speak is the long term inner fighting that has split many people from helping each other ...to ...suspecting who is back stabbing who...
I have never revealed your true name on this forum or any other, never.

With respect to this thread, only because MadMac has by his own volition made the full association to his actual name in this thread , and because i respect him as a person for the good times, and the tough acc times, we have shared is why I have responded to this thread as seen.


I do understand the issue around naming people. There is a paradigm of fear - the fear of your details being made public to threaten or harass or otherwise unstable the emotional state, for younger generations and those in the ....digital coin realm, it is called DOXXing

so what happens when fear is refused to be accepted? The loss of power. So what then?

In the particular post i replied to here was about whether naming people and how much they have received from ACC legitimately, it matters not how much any other claimant has ever been paid legitimately

Redfox:
as a matter of conscious communication it is irrelevant whether there are more than one of you writing your posts., it is evident there is more than one writing style, whether that be more than one person or one person trying to emulate being more than one, there is zero value in exploring that avenue when weighing what value may be obtained in view of the post i have responded to.


When my two previous posts are read as thay are meant to be, it is understood (and as i have since spoken to Gaffa09 and his lovely wife in person yesterday) i care not for any which forum, they are only a communication medium.

to quote redfox:

"Many claimants have no desire to involve themselves creating "a passive or secondary income that will help with daily,weekly,monthly or yearly expenses." Kewl, regardless of whether or not the offer to educate them is made by the ACC to do such a thing.

I know of a number of claimants who gave up waiting for the ACC to retrain them so they could get on with their lives but it seems ACC where content to allow them to stay on ACC and then finally get shafted onto WINZ. That in many ways works out a cheaper option for the WINZ ACC to take, don't you agree?


Reason for edit: Struck out WINZ and included ACC on last line."

well done. Does that now bring spotlight to the education system, whose results , in a simplified way, reflect that success of students memory recall is a percentage of how much their teachers taught? ponder it.
Could that it be the education system has systemically failed to better educate the country on wealth building and preservation and as such the viewpoint you stateremains valid
being :

" Many claimants have no desire to involve themselves creating "a passive or secondary income that will help with daily,weekly,monthly or yearly expenses." Kewl, regardless of whether or not the offer to educate them is made by the ACC to do such a thing.

I know of a number of claimants who gave up waiting for the ACC to retrain them so they could get on with their lives but it seems ACC where content to allow them to stay on ACC and then finally get shafted onto WINZ. That in many ways works out a cheaper option for the WINZ ACC to take, don't you agree?"


Surely that reflects one the decades of claimants claims of file mismanagement and legal recourse (and costs and failure of legal access as represented and agreed at the United Nations over the no fault scheme of full cover, no sue, pet assessors, the exit scheme and the many flavours of acc claim mismanagement that failed to actually deliver tangible results for our communities. You see, read back to the actual content of the post i responded to. My response was toward the naming of actual claimants whom have received entitlements, on the other hand, in the corresponding posts no one has written anything about the cost of bureaucracy failing as it is.

Calculate that.

From the times years ago when related sites such as " the mouse that Roared" revealed a similar insurance scheme of claimant exits and the similarities of complaints of failures to cover injuries and respective entitlements, would you agree it has been a successful social view that claimants are further disenfranchised by inner fighting due to the focus being change from the system failures to actual threats real or perceived towards claimants.?Has that worked?

Are ther any actual figures on how much bureaucracy has cost to prevent the intent of the ACC scheme under the woodhouse principles of the removal of the right to sue for an alleged no fault no sue cover. Of course not, it is muddied by employer ratings et al.


Kewl

You have covered so many different issues here that it is quite difficult to pull out what it is you wish me to read. So I am only answering the obvious, and that is your assistance to me in the past.

You seem to think that I forget or don't see the residual effects of that assistance. Hate to brust your bubble but I do see more than you think. And I know that you are aware of more than you say. Because I am sure that I know who you are.

You have benifited from my memory and what you have done for me, in the times you have rang me with explanations of what you have not been involved in.!! I do take note of what you say and when making decisions, I take into account that you have assisted me before.

However, when it comes to naming people, especially at the moment, with everyone pointing fingers at others it is important that neither you or I or anyone else be allowed to use anything other than the posters name registered on this forum.

I realise that I shorten names and try to stop doing that, but then I have been physically debilitated in 2015, so much so that it has stopped my legal work and interfered with my ability to type.

Maybe I should ask for a voice activated programme!!

I am determined to get back to as near as possible where I was before two breaks in both arms. This actually appears impossible, as residual injury has created more injury and will need to be assessed. Which reminds me I must get under way.

Sorry off track a bit. But I do hope you agree that pain will make one impatient, and that will cause words to be snappy and short. My understanding of this forum is that it has developed rules for one lot and none for the others which is very fraustrating. Your naming MadMac is another of those examples where there has been no action against your naming as the Admin knows who you are and decided not to apply the rules.

Lets see if he stands straight, in all instances, or only does anything about it in others.
I will let it be known to what instances I refer, when I can.

Mini
1

#346 User is offline   MadMac 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 179
  • Joined: 26-December 04

Posted 01 April 2016 - 07:24 AM

:wub: Hi everyone,










Guess what ...














Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee ha ...



















Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo who ...
















It's April Fools Day !!!!!











;) Have a great day.
0

#347 User is offline   not their victim 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10829
  • Joined: 04-August 08

Posted 01 April 2016 - 09:58 AM

oh Mad Mac

bless yer heart......

Happy oneth april to you too....
0

#348 User is offline   tommy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1965
  • Joined: 21-September 05

Posted 03 April 2016 - 04:20 PM

out of curiosity as to regarding Mad Macs "fracture " how is his overall capacities today and to what extent did it have a recovery per centageg rate as in tasking , as in work abilities and residual capacities, just a suggestion
0

Share this topic:


  • 18 Pages +
  • « First
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users