Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Outlaw Pete

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Stop being so dramatic Pete

Again, you are being disingenuous. You know well the term is a play on the word Impotent, and being used to denigrate and insult. Urban Dictionary:

Ordinarily, I'd have no problem with the term being used (which is why I've never reported it, nor posted about it in here before now) but when adjectives like 'Sleepy' are being banned to describe JB, it does beg the question as to why it is that you can call Trump pretty much anything you want but not Joe Biden.

Baffles me that anyone would bother reporting it to begin with tbh but it's crazy that mods would appease such people and ban the use of the expression Sleepy Joe in response. Come on, man. It's harmless.

Quantum Erasure

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Ordinarily, I'd have no problem with the term being used (which is why I've never reported it, nor posted about it in here before now) but when adjectives like 'Sleepy' are being banned to describe JB, it does beg the question as to why it is that you can call Trump pretty much anything you want but not Joe Biden. ...

I was wondering what was the #IMPETUS ...

Rodney Bathgate

I thought it was Sleazy Joe and Creepy Joe?

Timberrrrrrrr

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Again, you are being disingenuous. You know well the term is a play on the word Impotent, and being used to denigrate and insult. Urban Dictionary:



Ordinarily, I'd have no problem with the term being used (which is why I've never reported it, nor posted about it in here before now) but when adjectives like 'Sleepy' are being banned to describe JB, it does beg the question as to why it is that you can call Trump pretty much anything you want but not Joe Biden.

Baffles me that anyone would bother reporting it to begin with tbh but it's crazy that mods would appease such people and ban the use of the expression Sleepy Joe in response. Come on, man. It's harmless.

No Pete i don't and that's the first time.i have heard that used in that context, Linking to some random t-shirt site isn't really a strong argument you know.

OK pete.....here's the deal.

George Conway started the hashtag #IMPOTUS

Here's the story behind it

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/475524-george-conways-new-nickname-for-trump-starts-trend-impotus%3famp

Heres the important parts so you don't miss out

"An Update on IMPOTUS (IMpeached President Of The United States)," Conway, a frequent, and often fiery critic of the president tweeted Thursday night. 

The new acronym sought to combine the two ideas of impeachment and the presidential office into one

"Okay, you want a hashtag, you got it. #IMPOTUS," Conway later added.

Now maybe some have taken the hashtag and claimed #IMPOTUS means what you said but thats not its original meaning and I will continue to use it as mr Conway created it to be used.

osarusan

All those terms are stupid and petty, and do those using them no favours (EDIT: although I will admit I laughted the first time I saw SCROTUS being used 4 years ago).

Lets not kid ourseleves here, maybe it can be explained as Impeached POTUS, but there's no doubt it's a play on the word impotent.

Necro

Well I for one cannot wait for this election to be over with so all this petty idiotic nonsense goes away.

Please please make it stop

Gruffalux

On a feedback thread I presume one is allowed to point out sneering ad hominem...

"Ok Pete...I'll dumb it down for you..."

Timberrrrrrrr

Gruffalux wrote: »

On a feedback thread I presume one is allowed to point out sneering ad hominem...

"Ok Pete...I'll dumb it down for you..."

Noted and post edited, my bad.

Timberrrrrrrr

osarusan wrote: »

All those terms are stupid and petty, and do those using them no favours (EDIT: although I will admit I laughted the first time I saw SCROTUS being used 4 years ago).

Lets not kid ourseleves here, maybe it can be explained as Impeached POTUS, but there's no doubt it's a play on the word impotent.

But originally that's not what it was.

People take words and change them for their own purposes (fag used to be a ciggy, gay used to mean happy etc) but I use #IMPOTUS as it was meant in its original context and see no issue in continuing to use it in that context.

If Trumps biggest fan on boards has an issue with that then he should report my posts and let mods/admin decide if it can be used in that context.

Tom Mann Centuria

Necro wrote: »

Well I for one cannot wait for this election to be over with so all this petty idiotic nonsense goes away.

Please please make it stop

Don't think that genie will go back in the bottle I'm afraid.

osarusan

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

But originally that's not what it was.

People take words and change them for their own purposes (fag used to be a ciggy, gay used to mean happy etc) but I use #IMPOTUS as it was meant in its original context and see no issue in continuing to use it in that context.

If Trumps biggest fan on boards has an issue with that then he should report my posts and let mods/admin decide if it can be used in that context.

Again, lets not kid ourselves - if it had not resembled the word impotent, the term IMPOTUS would never have been coined.

Timberrrrrrrr

osarusan wrote: »

Again, lets not kid ourselves - if it had not resembled the word impotent, the term IMPOTUS would never have been coined.

Thats your take on it and its an opinion that you are entitled to hold. Conway explained what it meant when he coined it and I will go with his explanation over someone's "it sounds like X so it must mean X"

Gruffalux

The meaning of phrases can be changed over time I suppose, especially neologisms which are often whimsical. Can we all at least agree that ''Ridin with Biden'' means so much more than it used to?

Timberrrrrrrr

Gruffalux wrote: »

The meaning of phrases can be changed over time I suppose, especially neologisms which are often whimsical. Can we all at least agree that ''Ridin with Biden'' means so much more than it used to?

Didnt need that picture in my head :pac:

osarusan

osarusan wrote: »

Again, lets not kid ourselves - if it had not resembled the word impotent, the term IMPOTUS would never have been coined.

The first time I seen it used on here I thought someone had misspelled impetus.

Beasty

It's fair comment Pete, but I only recall seeing reports about "Sleepy Joe" since the first thread "Outlawed" it. I certainly am not reading through thise election threads. We gave enough going on with the reports we do get (across both forums) with the rising temperatures over the election and lockdiwn

I think similar principles should apply to Trump. I'm only on mobile at present but would be happy to make that clear in the election threads when I get chance

TBH we already have too many election threads but each one has already gained a log of traction. Once one reaches the 10k limit I think it best to move subsequent discussions into one of the others (and create a Megathresd). I suspect they are all going over similar ground (but that's only based on the reports I have seen)

Baggly

To clarify, i told a poster to stop using that phrase because when it was being used, it was being used to rile up and troll the 'other side'. On that basis, happy to keep an eye out for similar phrases used to describe Trump.

Ill echo the sentiment that the sooner the US election is behind us, the better.

ExMachina1000

Baggly wrote: »

To clarify, i told a poster to stop using that phrase because when it was being used, it was being used to rile up and troll the 'other side'. On that basis, happy to keep an eye out for similar phrases used to describe Trump.

Ill echo the sentiment that the sooner the US election is behind us, the better.

Trump is rarely mentioned without a jibe at his supporters added in with the sole intention of riling up the "other side "

It's also the same posters over and over again who at this stage know that they can do so with impunity.

If a mod was to access a Trump thread ban list the common denominator would be those who post in favour of Trump.
Not a level playing field

Baggly

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Trump is rarely mentioned without a jibe at his supporters added in with the sole intention of riling up the "other side "

It's also the same posters over and over again who at this stage know that they can do so with impunity.

If a nod was to access a Trump thread ban list the common denominator would be those who post in favour of Trump.
Not a level playing field

Well then by all means report these instances and the mods will take a look at them. Mods have way too much to do to read each post in every thread in each of our fora so we do rely on posters to bring issues to our attention.

ExMachina1000

Baggly wrote: »

Well then by all means report these instances and the mods will take a look at them. Mods have way too much to do to read each post in every thread in each of our fora so we do rely on posters to bring issues to our attention.

I tried that many a time as did others. Empty words. Not you personally but in general

Edit. I see mod Beasty has taken action and we are essentially starting on a level playing field so il hold my comments and see what happens

Thanks

Baggly

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I tried that many a time as did others. Empty words. Not you personally but in general

Edit. I see mod Beasty has taken action and we are essentially starting on a level playing field so il hold my comments and see what happens

Thanks

Ok thanks. FWIW, i cant remember seeing any such reports - hand on heart.

ExMachina1000

Baggly wrote: »

Ok thanks. FWIW, i cant remember seeing any such reports - hand on heart.

Well that's fair enough.

So just to clarify having a go at people because of their political beliefs or attaching derogatory and snide labels to same is no longer permitted?

Call Me Jimmy

Medical evidence that the mental status of the next president is relevant to the election... this is what we're dealing with. It shouldn't take a genius to figure this out from either side of the debate.

I don't have special insight, neither do they so the idea that it can be conclusive that old age doesn't affect Biden, or that Trump is lacking empathy is beyond parody.

Trump is an 'idiot' per astrofool, and no we don't have the medical evidence confirming that

weisses

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Trump is an 'idiot' per astrofool, and no we don't have the medical evidence confirming that

You don't need medical evidence for that ... A look at his twitter and incoherent ramblings during his rallies would suffice

Timberrrrrrrr

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Medical evidence that the mental status of the next president is relevant to the election... this is what we're dealing with. It shouldn't take a genius to figure this out from either side of the debate.

I don't have special insight, neither do they so the idea that it can be conclusive that old age doesn't affect Biden, or that Trump is lacking empathy is beyond parody.

Trump is an 'idiot' per astrofool, and no we don't have the medical evidence confirming that

Stupidity/idiocy are not considered to be medical conditions though.

Baggly

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

Medical evidence that the mental status of the next president is relevant to the election... this is what we're dealing with. It shouldn't take a genius to figure this out from either side of the debate.

I don't have special insight, neither do they so the idea that it can be conclusive that old age doesn't affect Biden, or that Trump is lacking empathy is beyond parody.

Trump is an 'idiot' per astrofool, and no we don't have the medical evidence confirming that

*Medical evidence there is an issue with their mental status.

Without actual medical evidence, its just a conspiracy theory. We have a separate forum for that.

ExMachina1000

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Stupidity/idiocy are not considered to be medical conditions though.

That's correct. It's an opinion.

Just like someone could let their opinion about Biden be known. They might be of the opinion that he is creepy. Creepy Joe Biden if you will.

Would that opinion be allowed?

Timberrrrrrrr

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

That's correct. It's an opinion.

Just like someone could let their opinion about Biden be known. They might be of the opinion that he is creepy. Creepy Joe Biden if you will.

Would that opinion be allowed?

Thats a question you would have to ask the mods.

Call Me Jimmy

Baggly wrote: »

*Medical evidence there is an issue with their mental status.

Without actual medical evidence, its just a conspiracy theory. We have a separate forum for that.

Do you know what a conspiracy theory is? Because It doesn't sound like it. Sounds like you're using a buzz word instead of making an argument.

What is the conspiracy? That when I see Joe Biden being unable to tell what state he is in that there is a cabal of people making me write that in a post?

Beasty

Baggly wrote: »

To clarify, i told a poster to stop using that phrase because when it was being used, it was being used to rile up and troll the 'other side'.

This is exactly the point

Anyone referring to Biden as "creepy" can expect sanction - all you are doing is winding up Biden's supporters

And yes it works the other way. If someone refers to Trump as a "rapist" or "moron" they can expect action.

Hopefully that draws a line under this specific point