I disagree with his choice to not name the place. Fot starters, I would like to know where not to go eat. Also, those people shaming him will basically get no consequence out of their hateful behaviour, so they will not learn. Loss of revenue would have been a great way to drive the point home.
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
80 points (98.8% liked)
United Kingdom
4108 readers
113 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in [email protected] or [email protected]
More serious politics should go in [email protected].
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
it's so fucking strange how people insist on being polite towards people who have shown them the precise opposite of politeness, like what will it take to make you not be polite? gonna get stabbed in the gut and go "bro! not cool."?
Well the dude is English, he'd probably apologize to the knife for being in the way and the stabber for bleeding on their shoes.
He's English. You have described a Canadian.
All they had to do is say all the tables are reserved. Not "leave!!! You ugly!!!"
It is possible that is a lawyers recomendation.
Due to him maybe planing to sue the shit out of the place. And naming them may harm his case.
He said they had told him that although it was a hate crime, it was "unlikely" officers could pursue it further.
Next sentence:
The Met confirmed to the BBC that officers had visited Mr Bromley about the incident and that although no arrests had been made, the force took "reports of hate crime seriously".
Pick one.
It's both. First before public repercussion, Second after...
He's lucky they could be arsed with writing it down.
He can sue for compensation under the Equality Act 2010.
As I understand it. From a lawyer.
Yep but you first have to win a disceimination case. Without thT they just deny the event.
Likely he would given the claimed comment. But without witnesses it can be hard to win.