 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The political leanings of Mudcat
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Acorn4 Date: 12 Oct 18 - 01:19 PM The point about logic is a good one. I still work part time as an exam invigilator and last week I was having to scribe for a student with a broken arms who would dictate me his answers and I would write them down. He had good vocabulary and could write good sentences but his answers all didn't seem to follow logical rules and he actually dictated two sentences which said exactly the same thing in different words. A strong case for introducing it on the curriculum as a core subject? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Raggytash Date: 12 Oct 18 - 01:39 PM I think you have it nailed Backwoodsman. However the second poster I think you refer to seems to be teflon coated. However I think that poster has been named and shamed for having threads closed and continues to do so but also continues (to my mind) to "get away with it" There may be a number of reasons for this, I have my own theories, which I am sure would be rejected by those who make those decisions. I suspect I may be censored for this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Oct 18 - 01:53 PM Sorry chaps but although posters do play a great part in what I am getting at, in that many seem surprised when their views are robustly refuted, I don't think it does any good to get personal. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Iains Date: 12 Oct 18 - 02:24 PM The normal rules of debate don't apply here. We have one poster whose main tactic is to insult and abuse. You forgot to add he deliberately misinterprets anything said to adds a little je ne sais quoi to his posts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Oct 18 - 03:34 PM Thread #165019 Message #3956308 Posted By: Dave the Gnome 12-Oct-18 - 12:44 PM Thread Name: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat
I would agree wholeheartedly, Joe, if this were a debating forum with formal rules. Yes, put up the idea. Back it up. Other people can refute it and then you get one chance to argue against them. That doesn't happen here though does it. People argue ad infinitum until someone gets sick of it. That is where your proposal fails. Sorry. Yeah, Dave, I get it. The "usual suspects" who have control of the BS Forum set the rules, and they don't want civil debate. They like the shit they've mired us in. Well, I don't like it. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Raggytash Date: 12 Oct 18 - 03:52 PM Hmmm ........ Sorry Joe, I do not consider that response to be rational or reasonable. I would go further and suggest that is a reply that I would expect from someone I perceive as being very conservative. I know you claim you are not. (Please see my previous post on that subject) If posters on the "other" side of any discussion posted rational, reasonable and responsible posts I am sure they would receive the same in return. However we are inundated with blogs from a source that most people consider to be a right wing agitator, posts which echo the "views" of our right wing press and often downright lies and distortions. I will go further again and state that when the frailties of those arguments are exposed the poster will twist, turn, prevaricate, deny and move the ******** goalposts so often you end up doubting your own sanity. I know you are aware of this as you have commented on it yourself. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Jeri Date: 12 Oct 18 - 04:01 PM This doesn't seem like it's ever going to get back on topic, because it's an opportunity to bitch. Personal opinion: Max should just get rid of BS for a month or two. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Oct 18 - 04:26 PM It seems to me that two mods here revel in this stuff, despite their protestations. They want us Brits to be as horrid as possible. It's depressing. Make me a mod and I'll clean this bloody place up within 24 hours. Only joking. Ish. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Donuel Date: 12 Oct 18 - 04:41 PM You made me laugh Steve. My position is this, I am for Federalism but I wish we the people were trusted with discoveries. I am a chicken shit male feminist. I talk big but do nothing substantial to help the cause. I knew union songs as a kid but I don't sing now. I used to think "what if the radical right got everything they ever wanted". Now that they have, I wish I never would have asked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Iains Date: 12 Oct 18 - 05:00 PM However we are inundated with blogs from a source that most people consider to be a right wing agitator, posts which echo the "views" of our right wing press and often downright lies and distortions. Yet no one has ever managed to find a flaw in his factual content. That is why the cabal attack the poster, not the post. Perhaps those most vociferous in attacking this "rightwing agitator" would care to give a few examples of "his downright lies and distortions." I await this with interest. Please provide the who,what,why,when and where to put some substance to you allegations. These are the same people that when the factual content of a post is such that they cannot rebut it or deny it, then they turn to ridicule and insult. I could attach huge lists to demonstrate this behaviour but even then they would argue. Furthermore they then have the temerity to complain when a sturdy response is generated to counter their behaviour. I suggest a study of Matthew 7:5 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Oct 18 - 05:03 PM God help us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Oct 18 - 05:16 PM Point taken, Joe, but if you give carte blanche to everyone then some are going to abuse that. The options then are to remove the right to post to those abusing that right or to live with it. We know the former can be effective as we have seen it in action with a number of 'problem' posters. We have also seen that when they are let back in that some people cannot help but to continue their serial abuse. I don't know what to suggest. I can't help you, sorry. But we are drifting from the thread again and discussing moderation policy. If you are happy to let that continue, please feel free. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Mossback Date: 12 Oct 18 - 05:21 PM Raggytash Date: 12 Oct 18 - 01:39 PM Hear Hear ! Got it in one. Personal opinion: Max should just get rid of BS for a month or two. Wouldn't it be logical, easier and more useful to get rid of the two obnoxious bullshit-posting arseholes in question, Jeri? Just askin'...... love you too. Bill |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 12 Oct 18 - 05:46 PM Trouble is, Bill, that means someone has to make a judgement as to who the obnoxious bullshit posting arseholes are. Different people will have different views on that. As I said before, the mods have a tough job and do it for free. It is unfair to expect them to 'take sides'. Even if it seems blatantly obvious who is causing the trouble! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Joe Offer Date: 12 Oct 18 - 05:57 PM Yeah, and Dave the Gnome is on the top of MY list. Good thing I don't believe in suppressing objectionable people, huh, Dave? All I do is disagree with them. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Mossback Date: 12 Oct 18 - 06:02 PM Hullo, Dave, Newbie here- I DON'T expect them to take sides -mjust to apply the rules even-handedly & without coddling their particular pets. That's hardly too much to ask, is it?? As for obnoxious bullshit, in this Internet age with all the reputable sites available to identify lies & untruths, it takes almost no time to identift toxic bullshit and the regular sources thereof - Breitbart et.al. - identifying those who post the obniouxios bullshit over and over should be relatively easy. I don't expect the Mods to vet each and every post, but if it quacks like InfoWars, or it walks like Alex jones, or if it spews like Donald Trump..... Be well, Bill |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Oct 18 - 06:02 PM Please stop being ridiculous, Joe. You won't like reading this back in the morning. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Oct 18 - 08:05 PM ANYWAY. By British standards, I'd say that most UK below-the-line frequent posters are on the left of politics. Before those two recent expulsions from the forum, the balance twixt left and right was much closer. I haven't noticed any revolutionary commies among us Brits (I was one for a short time in me misspent yoof, but, well, y'know, getting wed, kids, mortgage, foreign hols and all that...). There are two people among us Brits who are decidedly far-right, and, by coincidence or not, they are by far the two most objectionable Brits here in m'humble. As for you merkins, you all seem pretty united against Trumpery but you are mostly not of the left in any UK sense of the word. This end, we've regarded the likes of Hillary, Gore, Obama and Bill Clinton very much as we regard our Tories on the spectrum, though comparisons are a bit invidious as your domestic political context is nothing like ours. With one or two exceptions, calling most American posters here right-wing seems a bit weird. Right-wingers have no conscience, but conscience plays a big part with regard to most of the American posters here. Unfortunately, you do have two of the very worst serial trolls, not a word to be used lightly, but there's a suspicion that their personal off-forum relationships with some mods gives them a bye...sometimes... I think that political education in both countries is a shambles. Having spent a number of years in my teaching union trying to get something to change on that score, and getting called an evangelical commie bastard for me troubles, I can't see an easy way of getting round that. As Churchill said, possible misquote coming up, if you want to know what's wrong with democracy, just spend five minutes talking to the average voter... I'll get me coat... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Oct 18 - 08:13 PM Apologies if I've lumped yanks and Canuckistanis together, and if I've misinterpreted which side of the pond one or two people are on. I'm a bit bloody slow at catching on sometimes... :-( |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Stilly River Sage Date: 12 Oct 18 - 08:34 PM The normal rules of debate don't apply here. We have one poster whose main tactic is to insult and abuse. You forgot to add he deliberately misinterprets anything said to adds a little je ne sais quoi to his posts. Why describe yourself using the third person, Iains? This thread staggered along longer than I expected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: robomatic Date: 12 Oct 18 - 09:24 PM Feel the love. . . BTW Steve Shaw, please use an apostrophe where it is s'posed to be utilized. I don't appreciate my entire continent to be referred to as a pubic wig! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Steve Shaw Date: 12 Oct 18 - 09:43 PM Well you lot call us Brits. Don't be so sensitive! Anyway, I've seen some very nice pubic wigs...at least, I thought they were wigs... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Donuel Date: 12 Oct 18 - 10:42 PM pubic wig? … As long as we are name calling I have heard some call others obnoxious trolling ass holes. As well as: COLUMN A atrocious awful despicable disgusting execrable godawful grody gross hateable hateful heinous horrid lousy low-down maggot monstrous obnoxious odious offensive outrageous repugnant repulsive revolting rotten shocking sorry trolling vile abhorrent annoying disgusting hateful nasty objectionable reprehensible rotten stupid unpleasant abominable awful beastly big mouth detestable disagreeable dislikable displeasing foul gross hateable heel horrid insufferable invidious mean nauseating odious off-color ornery pain in the neck pesky pestiferous pill repellent repugnant revolting sickening stinking Ass Holes COLUMN B When it comes to actual ass holes have you ever really known a: agreeable decent friendly good great kind lovable moral nice pleasant pleasing welcome wonderful delightful likeable sweet smelling Ass Holes COLUMN C CHICKEN SUB BEEF PASTA At my Chinese Resaurant you get to choose one from column A B and C |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: robomatic Date: 12 Oct 18 - 11:00 PM Well, THAT was a real Kanye in the Oval Office moment... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Oct 18 - 02:28 AM I see no one solved my riddle of why Who would you prefer posting, Bruce or Kanye West? made me think of Batman. Well, since you are dying to know :-) Adam West played Batman, who's real name was Bruce Wayne! Back to reality... Joe, just what is it I am top of your list of? I guess it is "obnoxious bullshit posting arseholes" but, if not, I apologise for the misunderstanding. If it is, can you give me any examples of obnoxious bullshit that I have posted or explain in what way I am an arsehole? Unless I can understand what I am doing wrong, how can I correct it? None of this "you know what it is" please and, as you have made the statement in public, I would prefer to resolve it that way too. Entirely up to you if course. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Oct 18 - 03:40 AM Hi Bill. Thanks for the respose. Newbie or not, you seem to have got the measure of things pretty quickly and you are quite right with your statement about it being easy to find the real facts. Trouble is all these alt-truth sites never go so far as to actually lie. What they do is just give the part of the story that suits their agenda. This is part of what I am on about. The right wing think this is perfectly acceptable and when their pet news sites are accused of bias they begin to froth at the mouth. This may be acceptable behaviour at other sites but on a left-leaning liberal folk site like Mudcat it should and will be resisted. Cheers Dave |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Joe Offer Date: 13 Oct 18 - 04:06 AM Dave, you are manipulative and a tattle-tale. You are very good at setting people against each other, all the time acting like you are innocent. You start threads like this one that are clearly intended to cause trouble. As I've told you before, you remind me of the Eddie Haskell character on the Leave It to Beaver TV program, acting all nice to people in authority, and then turning around and stabbing people in the back. And you ask why I think you're a pain in the ass? You have campaigned more-or-less constantly for years for the banishment and suppression of various Mudcatters, beginning with Lizzie Cornish. Since you're on the top of my list, it's a good thing I don't believe in suppressing objectionable people, huh, Dave? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Iains Date: 13 Oct 18 - 04:30 AM "The normal rules of debate don't apply here. We have one poster whose main tactic is to insult and abuse. You forgot to add he deliberately misinterprets anything said to adds a little je ne sais quoi to his posts. Why describe yourself using the third person, Iains? " I look forward to you supplying examples of where I deliberately misinterpret posts in order to justify making a post more venemous. Many times you allow carroll to post long spiels of my alleged sins, but NEVER do you show the preceding posts that gave rise to the responses EverytimeI try to post an explanation it is deleted. Twice on this thread alone However here are a couple of examples that demonstrate perfectly what I mean: My post Another example is travellers. The vast majority now live in houses/flats/apartments and a small minority still travel. This small sector is a living anachronism like bodgers and coopers. If the vast majority of the population have to abide by a codified set of laws in order for society to function, why should a small group have the arrogance to suppose they can ignore whatever part of the legal code suits and create misery for thousands, besides costing the ratepayer vast sums? I do not have to give examples, the newspapers are full of them. They continue to try to live the life that has gone the way of the dodo. There is no place for it in the modern world-the same as armies no longer use bows and arrows. The totally distorted interpretation and response! From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 02 Oct 17 - 08:24 AM Iains self imposed and intolerant ignorance of the Travellers real situation is the most astounding piece of racist viciousness I have come across and highly dangerous if it were widely shared (did you say you were a Christian – I can't remember and am unable to work it out? That Traveller lifestyle I not chosen – it is what they weer born to – life in houses to them is as alien as life on the road would be to us if it was forced on us – they were once an essential part of British life, modernisation has left them behind Describing their life as obsolete, as you do is inhuman and obscene – the stuff holocausts have been made of. This is probably the most blatantly inhuman indifferent display of ignorance of the plight of an entire community in trouble I have ever encountered and it relates perfectly to whether laws should (or even can) be obeyed My post Well we have been through this before. Requisitioning property has only been carried out in wartime in the UK. Any council trying it would be laughed out of court, very expensively. It might work in a socialist jackbooted society but not in the uk. Your socialist dreams are a thinking persons's nightmare. The EU would also eviscerate any council trying such a stunt. Your suggestion is totally nonsensical as you very well know. It would destroy property rights at a stroke. It ain't going to happen and the streets would be running with blood before it did. The distorted interpretation and response From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 26 Sep 18 - 03:06 PM Thanks for confirming that you put property above human life Iains, though it wan't necessary I din't doubt it for a minute I prefer the humanity of teh feeling people, though I like to think that if people thought about things like this they might take a humanitarian approach to it rather than that of a Conservative economist I think you demonstrate the fact that, as things are the law serves the haves rather than the have nots Yur last sentence reads just like Charlton Heston's "Cold, dead hands" spech to the NRA - or even Enoch's "Rivers of Blood" I can see where you're coming from Jim Carroll My post There is also a requirement to accept western lifestyles are profligate and that there are simply too many people in the world, and of those an uncomfortably high percentage deserve a far higher standard of living that they receive at present.(80% live in poverty) Jim Carroll "As for silly talk about reducing the world population," Then what relevance does population have to the report "If the 80% in poverty were given a lifestyle to take them out of poverty co2 emissions would rise sharply." Now there's a thought starve the world to save it More and more a subject for 'The Horror Channel' as the suggestions cvome rolling in And the partonsing privilege - "given" underlines that Who do yuo people think you are to believe life and death cAN BE METED OUT TO SUIT SOCIETY Your 'wahatboutist' list is meaningless other than to absolve Britain from doing anything My post (In reponse to a posted article backed by links to national newspapers saying the exact same thing) Once again attacking the poster not the post. How very boring! Did you know Hitler was a nasty little man but he was a dammed fine Führer. Do you recognise the distinction? If not perhaps you should cease further posting as it could easily be construed as simply trolling. Carrolls reponse You've just compared me to "Hitler" - and now "moronic", yet you accuse us of behaving badly to you and a stunning piece of hypocrisy Jim Carroll Insulting someone's intelligence is, in my opinion, worse than insulting them personally. " Amen to that From: Jim Carroll - PM Date: 26 Feb 17 - 06:56 PM Try not to talk to people and remember you are a mental midget Iaians People with far more knowledge and experience have had their fingers burned on this forum by forgetting their place. You really are an obnoxiously smug bastard, aren't you - what a pity your contributions don't live up to your posturing - especially regarding your supporst for a mass murder and torturer. Christ - what a team - racists, fascists and moronic bullies who think they know more than anyone else after five minutes posting. Many many more examples available. It is quite obvious who the single most disruptive,insulting person is on mudcat. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Oct 18 - 05:14 AM Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Joe Offer - PM Date: 12 Oct 18 - 12:34 PM And therefore, the proper response should be to present ideas, with facts to back them up, and then to defend or refute those ideas with logic. So, come in, Joe. lets have some of that Jesuit thinking and logic you are always on about. Give us some facts to back up your statement Dave, you are manipulative and a tattle-tale. I won't be offended, honest. Let's do the right thing. You present the facts. I will defend myself. You post a counter argument using logic and I will do the same. That's it. 4 exchanges and no more will be said. Let's clear the air. But it will have to wait till next week. I will probably be too busy this weekend. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Oct 18 - 05:17 AM BTW - I am talking to Joe Offer the person, not Joe Offer the mod. Any deletion or closure could be seen as unfair advantage. Just saying. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: bobad Date: 13 Oct 18 - 08:09 AM "O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Iains Date: 13 Oct 18 - 08:26 AM I'll drink to that! Could be an education for many of us! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Jeri Date: 13 Oct 18 - 08:45 AM Joe, for fuck's sake, don't YOU start with the personal attacks, too! There's more than one "Eddie Haskell" in here. There seems to be a tendency to come into any BS thread loaded for bear. Which is why, I think a time-out may be in order. Maybe the fight club can get their rocks off somewhere else... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Backwoodsman Date: 13 Oct 18 - 09:16 AM Errrrrrmmm....who's Eddie Haskell? There's a very cool thing on the web called "Google" where you can get answers to many questions, and not advertise the fact you don't know. --Mod |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Jim Carroll Date: 13 Oct 18 - 10:06 AM Been off line since yesterday (thanks to Global warming storms) I'm appalled how this has degenerated into a slanging match - - with a once-respected mod participating fully in the slanging, unbelievable "You present the facts. I will defend myself."# I've already requested this of him - so far I have had no response He has described some of us (on the left significantly) as he has and refuses to discuss that accusation It seems he has joined 'The Dark Side' What a shame As far as Iains's behaviour - I intend to try and settle it by PM by sending him about fifty examples of his literally hundreds of personal insulting postings - if any mod would like a copy of those examples I'm happy to put them up publicly Unless all of us get a grip of our behaviour towards each other I see no future for this section of the forum - not for me anyway Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Mossback Date: 13 Oct 18 - 10:46 AM Joe, for fuck's sake, don't YOU start with the personal attacks, too! OOOPS!! Et Tu, Offer? Hoist by your own petard(once again) methinks. Love ya, Bill |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: peteglasgow Date: 13 Oct 18 - 10:50 AM jim - we've read many times of our intentions to ignore some contributors on here. why not just give it a try? once you are into a slanging match with others then some observers can't tell the difference between the participants. if you can't say anything nice etc... and - of course- none of this really matters, take it easy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Senoufou Date: 13 Oct 18 - 11:06 AM Call me a silly old biddy (and a Conservative at that) but I can't for the life of me see what people on here hope to achieve. If all you lot want with your load of ol' squit is a massively satisfying slanging match, then I concede that you've admirably managed it. After nearly 300 posts, this isn't going anywhere is it? I've had to smile at the several declarations of love though. (Steve, you false-hearted scallywag, I thought you were mine all mine...) :( I think the teacher on playground duty should ring the bell very loudly and all you fist-waving, frothing-at-the-mouth Very Angry People should line up in an orderly fashion and head for your respective classrooms. Or Mr & Mrs Smack will be invited to pay a visit to Bottyland. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Jim Carroll Date: 13 Oct 18 - 11:16 AM "why not just give it a try?" Have tried - as have others We then get accused of being petty by ostracising those we don't agree with I value this forum and in the main, have no problem with people who don't agree with - no point in being here otherwise We are all guilty of rising to the abuse - for me, the secret is to stop the abusers - they foul up the otherwise pretty friendly and interesting atmosphere and there really is no reason to tolerate them If they behaved as they do in a pub, they'd either be flug out on their ear otr else go home with their teeth in their pocket Their behaviour is chidish and , as it is carried out anonymously and from the safety of cyberspace, extremely cowardly I've just gathered together about thirty examples of personal abuse from two recent threads, posted by one individual and sent them to the culprit with the following message "These are selections of your abusive postings of two only threads this year - plenty more untouched I now intend to gather them all up and, if you continue to behave as you do, will post them to a mod and request that you be removed from this forum Jim Carroll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The political leanings of Mudcat From: Dave the Gnome Date: 13 Oct 18 - 11:23 AM I was trying to achieve some sort of understanding as to why right wing conservatives views cause such controversy, Eliza. I should have known better. People always look for the hidden agenda unfortunately. |