Why are so many good threads being hijacked by idiots?

[Syl]

I am getting sick of good threads descending into pathetically childish name calling drivel that would make a 10 year old seem ridiculous.. I, and I suspect many others just give up reading them. 

 It is  imo spoiling the debates and discussion for everyone else...and its happening more and more.

Where's Lord Foul when you need him??

[Raggamuffin]

You can't take this forum seriously these days, so why bother?

[Miffs2]

I am getting sick of good threads descending into pathetically childish name calling drivel that would make a 10 year old seem ridiculous.. I, and I suspect many others just give up reading them. 

 It is  imo spoiling the debates and discussion for everyone else...and its happening more and more.

Where's Lord Foul when you need him??

Agreed every thread ends up with the same.

[Guest]

Could be because threads run out steam after about 2-3 posts.

We are dealing with a severe lack of intelligence on here

['Wolfie]

Could be because threads run out steam after about 2-3 posts.

We are dealing with a severe lack of intelligence on here

If you quit this forum today, SmellyDumbKlutski, the average intelligence across the board would jump by several points, just with your absence...

[Miffs2]

Could be because threads run out steam after about 2-3 posts.

We are dealing with a severe lack of intelligence on here

If you quit this forum today,  SmellyDumbKlutski,  the average intelligence across the board would jump by several points, just with your absence...

I would call you a half wit, but that would be flattery.

[magica]

It happens on all forums Syl, there's always one lol.

[Guest]

Could be because threads run out steam after about 2-3 posts.

We are dealing with a severe lack of intelligence on here

If you quit this forum today,  SmellyDumbKlutski,  the average intelligence across the board would jump by several points, just with your absence...

Point in case.

This is why threads get hijacked, I would say wolfie is the worst culprit for thread derailment

[Guest]

Could be because threads run out steam after about 2-3 posts.

We are dealing with a severe lack of intelligence on here

The point this thread derailed

[Maddog]

Tribalism.

[Guest]

Tribalism.  

That's true.

People. Take sides they don't agree with just to stick J two fingers up at the other side

[Maddog]

Tribalism.  

That's true.

People. Take sides they don't agree with just to stick J two fingers up at the other side

There was a good article by a sociologist of some sort a few months ago about gun laws. She mentioned that some of the anti gun ideas of the left were proven to be ineffective in changing gun violence. However those supporting those measures didn't care. It's not really about making things better as much as it is irritating your political opponents.

[Guest]

That's true.

People. Take sides they don't agree with just to stick J two fingers up at the other side

There was a good article by a sociologist of some sort a few months ago about gun laws.  She mentioned that some of the anti gun ideas of the left were proven to be ineffective in changing gun violence. However those supporting those measures didn't care. It's not really about making things better as much as it is irritating your political opponents.  

That sounds bang on.

And its not limited to gun laws it permeates all issues and discussions.

Infowars sent their reporter into an anti trump area somewhere in the states and started asking people what they thought about trumps tax reforms and they loved it

They loved it because he told them it was bernies tax reforms.

[Original Quill]

If you quit this forum today,  SmellyDumbKlutski,  the average intelligence across the board would jump by several points, just with your absence...

Point in case.

This is why threads get hijacked, I would say wolfie is the worst culprit for thread derailment

Actually, when I saw this thread I immediately thought of you, Russ. You engage in a lot of malice and nonsense.

[eddie]

Could be because threads run out steam after about 2-3 posts.

We are dealing with a severe lack of intelligence on here

If you quit this forum today,  SmellyDumbKlutski,  the average intelligence across the board would jump by several points, just with your absence...

Quote Syl:

"I am getting sick of good threads descending into pathetically childish name calling drivel that would make a 10 year old seem ridiculous.. I, and I suspect many others just give up reading them.

It is imo spoiling the debates and discussion for everyone else...and its happening more and more.

Where's Lord Foul when you need him??"



Case in point.

[eddie]

If you quit this forum today,  SmellyDumbKlutski,  the average intelligence across the board would jump by several points, just with your absence...

Point in case.

This is why threads get hijacked, I would say wolfie is the worst culprit for thread derailment

Actually, when I saw this thread I immediately thought of you, Russ.  You engage in a lot of malice and nonsense.

Yeah because calling someone "smellylickybickyppobumbumnernerbolloxywank" is REALLY what we look for in a great debate.

You need to own your own bias against the fuckeries Quill. It isn't going unnoticed.

[eddie]

Tribalism.  

There aren't enough independent free-thinkers on here that aren't afraid to actually say what they mean and fucking own it.

[Guest]

Tribalism.  

There aren't enough independent free-thinkers on here that aren't afraid to actually say what they mean and fucking own it.  

Name them then?

Or are you one of those people?

[Raggamuffin]

IMO, it's the mindless insults and the "know all" attitude of some posters which wreck threads.

[Guest]

Actually, when I saw this thread I immediately thought of you, Russ.  You engage in a lot of malice and nonsense.

Yeah because calling someone "smellylickybickyppobumbumnernerbolloxywank" is REALLY what we look for in a great debate.  

You need to own your own bias against the fuckeries Quill. It isn't going unnoticed.

Why are you bothered about name calling?

Just get on with the debate

Smelly says about the most horrendus things going about women, ethnic groups, Muslims etc.

Do you think the names called to him, are worse than the hate he perpetuates?

He is not a snowflake and has broad shoulders and I think some on here just like to kick up a drama over anything

So what if people call each other names, its just words that are utterly meaningless

[Cass]

You can't take this forum seriously these days, so why  bother?

I honestly believe that you can’t take any forum seriously nowadays, whether it’s a free standing one like this or tied into a publication etc... For at least the last 10 years or so. Even the slow cooker/cooking/instapots groups have become ridiculous.

[Raggamuffin]

You can't take this forum seriously these days, so why  bother?

I honestly believe that you can’t take any forum seriously nowadays, whether it’s a free standing one like this or tied into a publication etc... For at least the last 10 years or so. Even the slow cooker/cooking/instapots groups have become ridiculous.

Yes, but this is supposed to a forum to discuss news, so it would be nice if there were actually some sensible debates without the nonsense that some people contribute.

[Original Quill]

Actually, when I saw this thread I immediately thought of you, Russ.  You engage in a lot of malice and nonsense.

Yeah because calling someone "smellylickybickyppobumbumnernerbolloxywank" is REALLY what we look for in a great debate.  

You need to own your own bias against the fuckeries Quill. It isn't going unnoticed.

When did I ever use the term: ""smellylickybickyppobumbumnernerbolloxywank"? I engage in serious political debate. When a thread migrates into names and insults, I generally leave it...not because I'm such a good guy, but because I'm bored.

We used to have a strong tradition of emphasizing the message over the messenger--a tradition that I started, initially on FF, and brought here--but now we have an influx of alt.right posters who who speak derisively about and to adversaries. That doesn't go unnoticed by me.

[eddie]

People can speak what they like about whatever they like. I tend to think when people need to start calling people silly-arse names most of us do an eye roll and move on to another thread.
Personally I don't think calling people silly names to try and insult them means a whole lot to most of us but it does sound like something a very small child might do - and you can't debate with a child.

And you don't use childish words like the one I mentioned - that's because you like proper debate and are a grown up, I assume.

[eddie]

Tribalism.  

There aren't enough independent free-thinkers on here that aren't afraid to actually say what they mean and fucking own it.  

Name them then?

Or are you one of those people?

I need to name them? I don't think I do. That's a bit like stating the obvious and I'm not really one to state the obvious.

[Guest]

Name them then?

Or are you one of those people?

I need to name them? I don't think I do. That's a bit like stating the obvious and I'm not really one to state the obvious.

Rubbish and gutless

You just harped on about people not being independent free thinkers and not actually saying what they mean. Where when I call you out on this, you clearly backtrack.

I have never had a problem speaking my mind and telling people exactly what I think

You clearly do not want to name, names, as you do not want to ruffle feathers with some people

[Tommy Monk]

With all the left wing/PC bias in the media these days, it would be nice to be able to discuss/debate things honestly and openly and from other angles, without leftys constantly just shouting SIXHIRB insults in an attempt to silence it...


You would think that if they were so right, they would have plenty of arguments to give in support to justify things... I wonder why they only ever shout abuse and SIXHIRB...?

[Guest]

With all the left wing/PC bias in the media these days, it would be nice to be able to discuss/debate things honestly and openly and from other angles, without leftys constantly just shouting SIXHIRB insults in an attempt to silence it...


You would think that if they were so right, they would have plenty of arguments to give in support to justify things... I wonder why they only ever shout abuse and SIXHIRB...?

So Tommy wants to deny free speech and protect racists, xenophobes, etc from being called out for what they are.

Quelle surprise

[Guest]

Tribalism.  

There aren't enough independent free-thinkers on here that aren't afraid to actually say what they mean and fucking own it.  

you think?

i think we're all pretty independent.

i have my opinion - no one has to agree with me but it's hardly likely to change my opinion (although not completely impossible)

[Guest]

With all the left wing/PC bias in the media these days, it would be nice to be able to discuss/debate things honestly and openly and from other angles, without leftys constantly just shouting SIXHIRB insults in an attempt to silence it...


You would think that if they were so right, they would have plenty of arguments to give in support to justify things... I wonder why they only ever shout abuse and SIXHIRB...?

So Tommy wants to deny free speech and protect racists, xenophobes, etc from being called out for what they are.

Quelle surprise

Read his second sentence. If a person believes in their argument then there is no need for name calling. once a person starts with the name calling,,,,racist/homophobic etc etc line it shows that they have no valid argument to offer.

[Guest]

So Tommy wants to deny free speech and protect racists, xenophobes, etc from being called out for what they are.

Quelle surprise

Read his second sentence.  If a person believes in their argument then there is no need for name calling.  once a person starts with the name calling,,,,racist/homophobic etc etc line it shows that they have no valid argument to offer.

Excuse me?

Come again?

If that person post something racist, then they are racist, period

The best thing for them to do is not be racist, dont you think?

To say its not valid is protecting those prejudice.

As what you are saying is people cannot rightly say if someone is being racist

The argument is never valid if hateful a prejudice, the point you glaringly miss

[Tommy Monk]

What I mean, Didge, is bring valid points/arguments/reasons about what is actually being said... not just keep popping up posting insults/SIXHIRB at posters...!


Quite simple...

[Guest]

What I mean, Didge, is bring valid points/arguments/reasons about what is actually being said... not just keep popping up posting insults/SIXHIRB at posters...!


Quite simple...

What valid points?

If something is racial in intent and prejudice, how is it valid?

[Guest]

I mean, for example, Gelico has never been to Paris.

I have and any others who have will tell you its beautiful.

So I know why Gelico classes it as a shithole and it has nothing to do with how beautiful the city looks but parts that have Muslims living there.

So is that not a xenophobic view?

She will claim a view of no-go areas, which is hyped up by some of the media.

The reality is any city has with certain criminal elements. Which has gone on for centuries with cities throughout the world.

So am I wrong to class her view as xenophobic or not?

To say I cannot point this out is again those prejudice, trying to defend those prejudice.

As Gelico has never been and yet she believes she can class somewhere a shithole. Its based on what she has read, not on what she has actually seen and its based around a bias of an ethnic people

[Guest]

Read his second sentence.  If a person believes in their argument then there is no need for name calling.  once a person starts with the name calling,,,,racist/homophobic etc etc line it shows that they have no valid argument to offer.

Excuse me?

Come again?

If that person post something racist, then they are racist, period

The best thing for them to do is not be racist, dont you think?

To say its not valid is protecting those prejudice.

As what you are saying is people cannot rightly say if someone is being racist

The argument is never valid if hateful a prejudice, the point you glaringly miss

that's because you are just so 2 dimensional didge, that is such a simplistic view

all arguments are valid, all opinions are equally valid

if you cant argue an opinion or point of view without accusing someone then you've kinda lost before you start, you shouldnt need to, the debate will just show different points of view is all

i'm not talking about banter either just the incessant screams of racist/homophobe/misogynist blah blah. and i dont think tommy was talking specifically about this forum either. it;s a general trend it seems to me

it's boring

[eddie]

Okay well there you go. Some people prefer to just debate the point and others think that calling someone a poo-head is just as effective as debate.

Case closed. Take your time it's simply really and furthermore....burrrrger.

[Guest]

Excuse me?

Come again?

If that person post something racist, then they are racist, period

The best thing for them to do is not be racist, dont you think?

To say its not valid is protecting those prejudice.

As what you are saying is people cannot rightly say if someone is being racist

The argument is never valid if hateful a prejudice, the point you glaringly miss

that's because you are just so 2 dimensional didge, that is such a simplistic view

all arguments are valid, all opinions are equally valid

if you cant argue an opinion or point of view without accusing someone then you've kinda lost before you start,  you shouldnt need to, the debate will just show different points of view is all

i'm not talking about banter either just the incessant screams of racist/homophobe/misogynist blah blah.  and i dont think tommy was talking specifically about this forum either.  it;s a general trend it seems to me

it's boring

I am the least 2 dimentional person going

Since when are all arguments valid?

Was the argument to exterminate the Jews a valid argument?

Everyone is entittled to an opinion, it does not make their opinion valid. 

A reasoned argument, not defined by prejudice and bias, makes for a good argument, but then even then someone can come up with something better.

So no, not all arguments are valid, some are crap, wrong, good and excellent.

See my previous post, to show, where to me, you were being xenophobic in your view of Paris

[Maddog]

I mean, for example, Gelico has never been to Paris.

I have and any others who have will tell you its beautiful.

So I know why Gelico classes it as a shithole and it has nothing to do with how beautiful the city looks but parts that have Muslims living there.

So is that not a xenophobic view?

She will claim a view of no-go areas, which is hyped up by some of the media.

The reality is any city has with certain criminal elements. Which has gone on for centuries with cities throughout the world.

So am I wrong to class her view as xenophobic or not?

To say I cannot point this out is again those prejudice, trying to defend those prejudice.

As Gelico has never been and yet she believes she can class somewhere a shithole. Its based on what she has read, not on what she has actually seen and its based around a bias of an ethnic people

I've never been to Somalia. I'm pretty sure it's a shithole by and large.

[Guest]

I mean, for example, Gelico has never been to Paris.

I have and any others who have will tell you its beautiful.

So I know why Gelico classes it as a shithole and it has nothing to do with how beautiful the city looks but parts that have Muslims living there.

So is that not a xenophobic view?

She will claim a view of no-go areas, which is hyped up by some of the media.

The reality is any city has with certain criminal elements. Which has gone on for centuries with cities throughout the world.

So am I wrong to class her view as xenophobic or not?

To say I cannot point this out is again those prejudice, trying to defend those prejudice.

As Gelico has never been and yet she believes she can class somewhere a shithole. Its based on what she has read, not on what she has actually seen and its based around a bias of an ethnic people

a) so you would talk about me rather than to me even though you know i'm here (yes, very adult didge)
b) yes, I have been to Paris, twice but not in recent years
c) I have seen enough recent footage of what Paris is like now to not particularly want to return

it certainly looked like a shithole

it's my opinion and it's valid

[Guest]

that's because you are just so 2 dimensional didge, that is such a simplistic view

all arguments are valid, all opinions are equally valid

if you cant argue an opinion or point of view without accusing someone then you've kinda lost before you start,  you shouldnt need to, the debate will just show different points of view is all

i'm not talking about banter either just the incessant screams of racist/homophobe/misogynist blah blah.  and i dont think tommy was talking specifically about this forum either.  it;s a general trend it seems to me

it's boring

A reasoned argument, not defined by prejudice and bias, makes for a good argument,

indeed and i will add

a reasoned argument, not defined by name calling makes for a good argument also

so we are agreed then

jolly good

btw what you said about Paris was bollox

[Guest]

I mean, for example, Gelico has never been to Paris.

I have and any others who have will tell you its beautiful.

So I know why Gelico classes it as a shithole and it has nothing to do with how beautiful the city looks but parts that have Muslims living there.

So is that not a xenophobic view?

She will claim a view of no-go areas, which is hyped up by some of the media.

The reality is any city has with certain criminal elements. Which has gone on for centuries with cities throughout the world.

So am I wrong to class her view as xenophobic or not?

To say I cannot point this out is again those prejudice, trying to defend those prejudice.

As Gelico has never been and yet she believes she can class somewhere a shithole. Its based on what she has read, not on what she has actually seen and its based around a bias of an ethnic people

a)  so you would talk about me rather than to me even though you know i'm here (yes, very adult didge)
b)  yes, I have been to Paris, twice but not in recent years
c)  I have seen enough recent footage of what Paris is like now to not particularly want to return

it certainly looked like a shithole

it's my opinion and it's valid

1) Misdirection and zero relevance, as i said it on the very thread

2) So not in years

3) So nothing you have actually seen

And what made you come to the conclusion its a shithole?

Come on lets have some honesty?

Was it the Eiffel Tower, the Notre Dame, the markets, scenary?

Come on lets here was videos you have watched

[Guest]

A reasoned argument, not defined by prejudice and bias, makes for a good argument,

indeed and i will add

a reasoned argument, not defined by name calling makes for a good argument also

so we are agreed then

jolly good

btw what you said about Paris was bollox

How is it name calling to class someone what they are?

So we are not agreed

And you want to still defend prejudice people

Quelle surprise

[Guest]

Still waiting to see these videos Gelico

Anytime would be good

[Tommy Monk]

Didge... people are free to make their own minds up about things... and a discussion/debate about anything should be based on relevant points/facts/arguments... there is no want/need for any poster to be here trying to be some sort of self appointed morally superior PC police cunnystubble and judge over what other posters say...!

[Raggamuffin]

Didge will never be able to debate properly on here. If someone doesn't say exactly what he wants them to say, he hurls abuse at them, and then says he's being "honest". He's not, he's being abusive.

[Guest]

Still waiting to see these videos Gelico

Anytime would be good

go look them up for yourself

[Guest]

Didge... people are free to make their own minds up about things... and a discussion/debate about anything should be based on relevant points/facts/arguments... there is no want/need for any poster to be here trying to be some sort of self appointed morally superior PC police geranium and judge over what other posters say...!

Again what relevant points, if they are prejudiced and biased?

Again you are entittled to say what you like, just as i am.

It seems, you want to censur speech in favour to allow yourself free reign to be prejudiced

Aint going to happen

[Guest]

indeed and i will add

a reasoned argument, not defined by name calling makes for a good argument also

so we are agreed then

jolly good

btw what you said about Paris was bollox

How is it name calling to class someone what they are?

So we are not agreed

And you want to still defend prejudice people

Quelle surprise

i am supporting civil debate no matter how unpalatable certain views may be

[Guest]

How is it name calling to class someone what they are?

So we are not agreed

And you want to still defend prejudice people

Quelle surprise

i am supporting civil debate no matter how unpalatable certain views may be

How is it uncivil to call out a racist as being racist?

[Guest]

i am supporting civil debate no matter how unpalatable certain views may be

How is it uncivil to call out a racist as being racist?

well, if that's all you're capable of then that's all you will do

whatevs

[Sponsored content]