DS Forums

 
 

The double standard with Paloma was shocking!


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-11-2010, 19:39
The Abrogator
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 363
but a wiser man would have thought do i want a liar, manipulator, disloyal and disruptive person in my team, do i want a vicious and underhand individual who is not prepared to accept any responsibility for failure .

the fact is she was prepared to be dishonest disloyal in front of alan sugar .. any boss does not want to see that in any potential employee.

nor does any boss want to be manipulated into a situation where he is firing the wrong person for the wrong crime.

can anyone work with someone so underhand and a schemer .. everyone would be too busy watching their backs rather than the business.
Exactly. Someone like her would soon make many enemies and disrupt a business.

Her own double standards were shown up for what they where when she praised Sandeesh but still took her into boardroom. She couldn't be trusted, all smiles and compliments one moment and sticking the knife in next. Dangerous.
The Abrogator is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 04-11-2010, 19:46
DaisyLou
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 795
Paloma threw her toys out of the pram. She deserved the boot.
DaisyLou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 20:14
nurseynurse
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 272
I cringed for her when I saw her "highlights" on "You're Fired". There are usually shots of the fired candidate in unguarded moments, laughing, mucking about and generally looking human. Paloma's had none of these, she looked perfectly poised and controlled, and a little aloof, in every shot, which suggested to me that the poor girl never ever relaxes and lets herself go. What a very sad way to live if you never have a good old belly laugh or never dance a little jig of joy.
nurseynurse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 20:28
-Flossie-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 198
*attempts to remember last time he jigged a dance of joy*
-Flossie- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 21:28
fredster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
For all his faults, Stuart never attacked other candidates in his 2 times in the boardroom like Paloma did. He was gobby yes, but he wasn't spiteful. So no double standard in my opinion.
I wonder if SAS sees himself like Stuart when he was younger, determined to get to the top.

It is interesting that whatever team stuart has been in that has failed the task has resulted in him being taken into the boardroom each time. \surely SAS must notice this?
saying that Paloma deserved to go last night, silly girl, must be kicking herself after Nick telling her that, He and SAS had her marked as the favourite to win.
fredster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 21:59
parthy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,010
*attempts to remember last time he jigged a dance of joy*
I'm sure you know full well what the poster meant.
parthy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 22:24
-Flossie-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 198
Yes, the poster was suggesting that dancing some sort of jig is commonplace. What did you interpret it to mean?
-Flossie- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 23:04
Monkseal
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,654
I wonder if SAS sees himself like Stuart when he was younger, determined to get to the top.

It is interesting that whatever team stuart has been in that has failed the task has resulted in him being taken into the boardroom each time. \surely SAS must notice this?
saying that Paloma deserved to go last night, silly girl, must be kicking herself after Nick telling her that, He and SAS had her marked as the favourite to win.
That's true of Alex, but not Stuart.
Monkseal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 23:16
Marmite Baby
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Northampton, UK
Posts: 3,247
It is interesting that whatever team stuart has been in that has failed the task has resulted in him being taken into the boardroom each time. \surely SAS must notice this?.
Remind me who Paloma brought back into the boardroom with her.
Marmite Baby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 23:34
Sherlock_Holmes
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,283
That's true of Alex, but not Stuart.
And kinda true about Sandeesh as well (Laura did pick her first before she changed her mind).
Sherlock_Holmes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 23:42
parthy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,010
Yes, the poster was suggesting that dancing some sort of jig is commonplace. What did you interpret it to mean?
He/she wasn't being quite that literal. They were pointing out that Paloma never showed any moments in the house where she had switched off and relaxed a bit:

What a very sad way to live if you never have a good old belly laugh or never dance a little jig of joy.
Dancing a jig wasn't the only example given. A little more imagination would have been able to stretch beyond those two examples.
parthy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 23:47
billio
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,500
I wasn't impressed by her business sense at all. Alex made some valid points re the shop but she dismissed them as she dislikes him.

Her decision to sell the ludicrous recycled clothing was as daft as previous weeks' attempts to be a super sharp wheeler dealer. Integrity, graft, good judgement are what counts and she's lacking on at least two of those.
billio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2010, 23:50
academia
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 16,299
Wasn't it the fact that she attacked her colleagues in a very unprofessional way in the boardroom rather than taking the time to explain why she should be saved rather than fired that finished her off?
That's it exactly - she was venomous in her negativity. An impossible creature.
academia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 02:24
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
Paloma was two faced, picked on her team and was overrall an unpleasant candidate. She rubbed everyone the wrong way and didn't gel with her team at all. It had to be her way or the high way. She was negative and nit picked the whole time.
That's actually the very opposite of what she did. Her team were very clear that she'd been a good PM, and she did seem to gel with them (with the exception of Alex). She was constantly praising members of her team and did so again in the boardroom.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 02:28
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
People seen to have forgotten the argument in the street caused by her and the exclusivity offer that wasn't in her power to give. AS would clearly know all about these but was unable to do anyhting about it last week. Add to that the catfight in the boardroom earlier in the series that she was involved it and the result was that it was her time to go.
Paloma certainly made a mistake over exclusivity, but the argument in the street was clearly caused by Laura.

She was involved in the catfight (if you want to call it that; it seems to be a bit of an exaggeration to me) in the boardroom, but so were pretty much all the girls except Stella (on the other team).
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 02:30
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
Paloma's attacks were very different to the attacks of others, she was savage, deeply personal, unprincipled and often totally unjustified. Many of them seemed desperate and petty and she seemed to relish abusing of others and she indicated clearly nothing but contempt for her fellow human beings.
I didn't see that at all. She was too negative about her rivals as she grew increasingly desperate to stay in, but I don't think she relished it the way Katie plainly did with Adam in Series 3, nor was she nearly so personal.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 02:32
DavetheScot
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 16,500
What talent does she have?

She refused to acknowledge Alex's efforts to get the ad. Frankly I think she was miffed that SHE wasn't in it.
She acted all haughty about the sparkly frocks instead of buttering up the designer.
She was mad for the unsaleable recycled items. Chris managed to push that ludicrous dress. But that range was a non-starter!

So what talents has she exactly?
She did sell most on her team, and actually she did manage the team pretty well.
DavetheScot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 03:25
Tercet2
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 921
I didn't see that at all. She was too negative about her rivals as she grew increasingly desperate to stay in, but I don't think she relished it the way Katie plainly did with Adam in Series 3, nor was she nearly so personal.
I agree. Quite a few candidates in the past have been very negative about others as they got desperate. The boardroom segment encourages that. It's better if you don't in the long run, but I didn't hear anything worse than some who have survived have done. I think she did give off the attitude that I'm one of the strongest this year, and sadly some of the previous mistakes didn't support that. Sugar may have learnt his lesson with Katie or Micheal. Those who plan on saving themselves by BR performances as a tactic might find it isn't going to work this series.
Tercet2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 04:42
Tourista
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dagenham Essex UK
Posts: 9,714
Who else could have Paloma brought back in. Too be honest Paloma was stuck with terrible team members and did really well considering. I would have made exactly the same choice as Paloma for bringing Sandeesh back in. It was obvious Alex had to come back and even though everyone else was rubbish Sandeesh has been the most consistently rubbish every week. Alan Sugar should have just fired the whole team and kept Paloma.
Kept Paloma?...

What nonsense.

Paloma not a few minutes before her choosing, had been PRAISING Sandeesh, so her choice of bringing her back made no sense, and while she hasnt shone so far, Sandeesh did a reasonable job in the task.

It is NOT Paloma's job to decide anything based on other weeks tasks, but her own alone.

As to Alex, apart from not getting the pitch area correct, Alex was spot on in his comments, and had the idea of the Trafford channel advert, so Paloma's bare faced lie about who was responsible for it was pathetic.
Tourista is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 08:43
WinterFire
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,230
I see no double standard at all. Paloma was an ars*, and got fired. Nobody else was anywhere near as much of an ars* as her except Melissa, who was fired last week.

Personally I believe that Alan Sugar has become sensitive to public perceptions of his acumen, and hence isn't keeping the "good television" characters in until the end.
WinterFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 09:35
apaul
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 9,699
She did sell most on her team, and actually she did manage the team pretty well.
Yes, and if she had stuck to highlighting this in the boardroom instead of being spiteful and trying to tell Sugar what to do she would have been saved.
apaul is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 10:20
Jocko Homo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Location, Location...
Posts: 2,210
Yes, and if she had stuck to highlighting this in the boardroom instead of being spiteful and trying to tell Sugar what to do she would have been saved.
Exactly. This task was quite similar to the wedding dress task a few years back. Helene actually did worse than Paloma because she got the product wrong and was bad at selling but she stuck up for herself well in the boardroom without being (as) aggressive and survived.
Jocko Homo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 11:07
-Flossie-
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 198
I didn't see that at all. She was too negative about her rivals as she grew increasingly desperate to stay in, but I don't think she relished it the way Katie plainly did with Adam in Series 3, nor was she nearly so personal.
She may not have relished abusing and demeaning others with jokes and a smile on her face but she drew great satisfaction from abusing and disparaging her fellow candidates. She had contempt for them and for most other people with whom she came into contact. Her self-aggrandisement and spiteful abuse of others seemed to be her natural inclination.

However, I do believe she is extraordinarily adaptable, a human chameleon in terms of character, she adopts a character that she believes gains maximum advantage in any situation: where she believes aggression, savagery and ruthlessness are expected and profitable she will adopt those traits, and where they are inappropriate and unprofitable, such as in YBF, she will adopt entirely opposite traits.

I have yet to decide if she does have a moral framework which she suppresses if she perceives it as inconvenient when striving for success and status, or if she is prepared to adopt any moral framework that is advantageous at any one moment.

Was she really being sincere in YBF where she admitted to being aggressive and morally questionable and implied she accepted she had been abusive of others in her ruthless and self-serving approach and regretted much of it and had now learnt a life-changing lesson and changed her approach to life? Or was this an insincere expediency because she was faced with a morally-inclined and potentially critical audience, in the studio and in the outside world? With someone as clever and quick thinking as she is, determining whether she presents a pragmatic façade or is being genuine, is extremely difficult.
-Flossie- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 12:50
fredster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
That's true of Alex, but not Stuart.
Sorry senior moment
fredster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2010, 12:51
fredster
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 23,464
Remind me who Paloma brought back into the boardroom with her.
Sorry to you too
fredster is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 00:30.