Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

CtevenSrowder

Effects wrote: »

Doesn't always work like that though. Sometimes the regular passengers are the ones who have to suffer.

Not in this instance they don't.

Effects

nullzero wrote: »

You want evidence of crusades (that george was shot because he was black)?

Look through your own contribution to that thread. You're a prime example.

Now you're just twisting the facts and have lost your argument. I never said he was shot because he was black. Now you're making up who was saying that, without any evidence. You said there were 'crusades' saying he was shot because he was black. Then you can't back up your claim.

I've never brought race into the argument in that thread at all.

I never said it wasn't justified, I said it could have been handled differently and resulted in an outcome where someone didn't lose their life.

Then I just pointed out how it might not have happened exactly like posters were claiming, but no one was interested in hearing an argument that didn't fit their own 'narrative'.

The facts will be borne out in the investigation, but by that stage people will have already moved on.

Just drop your argument, you've lost. Move on.

I'm not going to bother responding on this thread about it anymore.

gozunda

Overheal wrote: »

If that were actually the case, that cohort would be sanctioned for abusing the system.

I think you’ll find some certainly were. They then started kicking up a racket here.

A case of those complaining the loudest? .

I remember being in an A&E a number of years ago where the casualties of a drunk driver were brought in after he had hit another vehicle at high speed. The drunk driver was also brought in for some minor cuts and abrasions

The night in question the A&E was very busy. What was most noticeable - was that the drunk driver who was roaring and shouting got the medical staffs attention before anyone else.

nullzero

Effects wrote: »

Now you're just twisting the facts and have lost your argument. I never said he was shot because he was black. Now you're making up who was saying that, without any evidence. You said there were 'crusades' saying he was shot because he was black. Then you can't back up your claim.

I've never brought race into the argument in that thread at all.

I never said it wasn't justified, I said it could have been handled differently and resulted in an outcome where someone didn't lose their life.

Then I just pointed out how it might not have happened exactly like posters were claiming, but no one was interested in hearing an argument that didn't fit their own 'narrative'.

The facts will be borne out in the investigation, but by that stage people will have already moved on.

Just drop your argument, you've lost. Move on.

I'm not going to bother responding on this thread about it anymore.

You made it about race when you came onto this thread saying the George Nkencho thread was full of generalised racism, something which you cannot provide a shred of evidence to support because it isn't true. A lot of us in that thread had an idea of what your motivations were and now with what you're saying here those ideas have been verified.

You were careful to not raise the issue of race on that thread but you throw accusations of racism around here about that thread like confetti. There's no winning or losing here, I'm not sure what's going on in your head my friend but it's not resulting in anything approaching joined up thinking.

I'm not sure how you think I've "lost" anything, you have some neck attempting to take the moral high ground with a post like that after I repeatedly asked you to PM me about instead of replying on this thread.

It's no wonder you've accumulated so many thread bans with that approach to debate.

As for on topic discussion, I still believe in light of the ongoing arrangement of protests and vigils etc in relation to this case, that the ongoing discussion in that thread is warranted.

EDIT: I can accept any posts I have made in response to the above user to be deleted. I only wanted to defend my position but understand thing deteriorated and went wildly off topic. If an arse kicking is in the offing then it's my own fault.

Effects

You made stuff up. You cast aspersions. You got caught out. It's pretty simple.
Quit trying to change the subject and fling mud in a different direction.

I've no interest in sending you a pm, as you refuse to backup your claims. Why waste my time?

Davaeo09

"It's no wonder you've accumulated so many thread bans with that approach to debate."

Now this I wish I knew before hand when he was spewing's his wokisms

Gatling

Effects wrote: »

You made stuff up.

Like you claiming to be involved in the thread from the start ?

Not true either and not for the first time you made such a claim

Effects

Gatling wrote: »

Like you claiming to be involved in the thread from the start ?

Not true either and not for the first time you made such a claim

Completely true. I started following the thread when there was less than ten posts on it. I don't remember another occasion where I made the same claim though. You can jog my memory if you like.

You seem to be back to ignoring facts and changing the subject.

Overheal

Omackeral wrote: »

If the community wants to discuss something, let them discuss something. Should really be that simple. As long as nobody is breaking rules. If they are, punish them accordingly. Like any other thread. Shouldn’t have to be a process whereby one mod’s secret criteria constitutes what’s up for debate and what’s not.

Sure yeah talk is harmless just ask the US Congress

—

Lads the whole schtick of accusing others of reporting posts is tiring. It’s a lot like watching modern witch trials; you have no actual knowledge of who is reporting whom for what except in off cases where a user says “I reported this.” You all sound a bit paranoid accusing your neighbors of calling the cops but not taking any responsibility for the reasons they were called in the first place. It’s rampant paranoia and victimhood.

This is it

Overheal wrote: »

Sure yeah talk is harmless just ask the US Congress

?

What has that got to do with the post you quoted. He clearly said "as long as nobody is breaking rules".

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

Sure yeah talk is harmless just ask the US Congress

—

Lads the whole schtick of accusing others of reporting posts is tiring. It’s a lot like watching modern witch trials; you have no actual knowledge of who is reporting whom for what except in off cases where a user says “I reported this.” You all sound a bit paranoid accusing your neighbors of calling the cops but not taking any responsibility for the reasons they were called in the first place. It’s rampant paranoia and victimhood.

The issue is that the threads that are being closed tend to be ones that fall into certain categories.

As mentioned before the US Congress has nothing to do with the topic at hand, what exactly were you inferring?

Overheal

I think it’s very clear what I’m inferring. Winking and nudging within the rules can still lead to violent ends IRL. That is one among the reasons the site runs with volunteer moderation and not bot-o-matic moderation.

This is it

Yeah, I think you're losing the run of yourself here. I've expressed my opinion, I'll leave it there.

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

I think it’s very clear what I’m inferring. Winking and nudging within the rules can still lead to violent ends IRL. That is one among the reasons the site runs with volunteer moderation and not bot-o-matic moderation.

I don't recall you contributing to the thread in question, at least not in manner you usually do in threads which you engage with.

Do you feel the posting on the George Nkencho thread was going to lead to violent ends as you put it?

Omackeral

Overheal wrote: »

Sure yeah talk is harmless just ask the US Congress

What they do in that cesspool of a country is of no relevance to this discussion.

Overheal

nullzero wrote: »

I don't recall you contributing to the thread in question, at least not in manner you usually do in threads which you engage with.

Do you feel the posting on the George Nkencho thread was going to lead to violent ends as you put it?

Anytime you allow racism to foment itself it will lead to more hate crimes.

Omackeral wrote: »

What they do in that cesspool of a country is of no relevance to this discussion.

Charming. But in fact it is relevant, more relevant than Joseph Goebbels insinuations.

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

Anytime you allow racism to foment itself it will lead to more hate crimes.



Charming. But in fact it is relevant, more relevant than Joseph Goebbels insinuations.

You'll need to provide evidence of said racism if your claims are to be taken seriously I'm afraid.

Overheal

nullzero wrote: »

You'll need to provide evidence of said racism if your claims are to be taken seriously I'm afraid.

Oh, of course, you need evidence of that but not for the reported-post witch trials. Can't be having consistent standards now.

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

Oh, of course, you need evidence of that but not for the reported-post witch trials. Can't be having consistent standards now.

We can point out a number of threads that were closed after this type of complaint culture was employed, they have been mentioned previously.

If the racism in a thread you obviously know nothing about was so obvious, surely providing evidence of that racism should be a simple task.

Overheal

nullzero wrote: »

We can point out a number of threads that were closed after this type of complaint culture was employed, they have been mentioned previously.

If the racism in a thread you obviously know nothing about was so obvious, surely providing evidence of that racism should be a simple task.

Would it?

Beasty wrote: »

Approximately 1 in every 11 posts made in the thread were deleted

Numerous mod warnings were issued, along with threadbans, cards and forum bans. A final in-thread warning was issued yesterday.

A mod was dealing with reports and closing the thread at 2 o'clock this morning.

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

Would it?

Did you stop to see why the posts were deleted?

Typically it was petty off topic bickering (like what we're engaged in).

I read the thread daily and don't recall seeing overtly racist rhetoric used at any point.

What is your knowledge base in relation to racism within the Republic of Ireland? Do you believe this is an institutionally racist country?

frozenfrozen

and let it be known not 1 in every 11 posts was deleted for racism.

Overheal

frozenfrozen wrote: »

and let it be known not 1 in every 11 posts was deleted for racism.

How would you know? How would you prove it?

nullzero

frozenfrozen wrote: »

and let it be known not 1 in every 11 posts was deleted for racism.

Doesn't stop that crowd from making false equivalences and piling in on the thread.

Overheal

nullzero wrote: »

Did you stop to see why the posts were deleted?

Typically it was petty off topic bickering.

I read the thread daily and don't recall seeing overtly racist rhetoric used at any point.

What is your knowledge base in relation to racism within the Republic of Ireland? Do you believe this is an institutionally racist country?

I don't expect people who deny racism to see racism when it slaps them in the face.

frozenfrozen

Overheal wrote: »

How would you know? How would you prove it?

That's incredibly easy to prove.

"Yes I deleted those posts within the last hour, made by several users, (not sure what earlier posts you are referring to as I wasn't online earlier)

They were not discussing the topic of the thread. It was you and another user arguing about having poor standards of discussion and dodging questions or something along those lines. They were off topic and will not be restored."

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

How would you know? How would you prove it?

Same goes for you.

JeffKenna

Overheal wrote: »

Would it?

Be interesting to get those same stats for the Trump thread.

nullzero

Overheal wrote: »

I don't expect people who deny racism to see racism when it slaps them in the face.

Are you saying I deny racism?

Prove it.

Overheal

frozenfrozen wrote: »

That's incredibly easy to prove.

"Yes I deleted those posts within the last hour, made by several users, (not sure what earlier posts you are referring to as I wasn't online earlier)

They were not discussing the topic of the thread. It was you and another user arguing about having poor standards of discussion and dodging questions or something along those lines. They were off topic and will not be restored."

Is racism not a poor standard of discussion?