Unpopular Opinions - OP Updated with Threadban List 4/5/21

cms88

Brian? wrote: »

Why did you put a word in quotation marks when it wasn’t a quotation? I asked why it was, not what it was.

Are you purposefully being cryptic?

Nope here you are asking what it is.

What is atheist in quotation marks?

You can go and check it again yourself if you want to.

ohnonotgmail

cms88 wrote: »

Nope here you are asking what it is.

What is atheist in quotation marks?

You can go and check it again yourself if you want to.

why did you put atheist in quotation marks?

Brian?

cms88 wrote: »

Nope here you are asking what it is.

What is atheist in quotation marks?

You can go and check it again yourself if you want to.

Well I apologise. That was a typo. Sorry.

So why was it in quotation marks?

cms88

Brian? wrote: »

Well I apologise. That was a typo. Sorry.

So why was it in quotation marks?

I've already explained elsewhere

Antares35

cms88 wrote: »

I've already explained elsewhere

Where?

cms88

Antares35 wrote: »

Where?

Go back a few pages. It's pretty simple to do to be fair.

partyguinness

Brian? wrote: »

No actually, everyone has inherent bias. But you can learn to acknowledge them and control the urge to be prejudicial.

Saying everyone is prejudiced is just an excuse not to change.

...but if feel the need to learn to acknowledge and control the urge to be prejudicial then you are acknowledging that very prejudice must exist in the first place....which is my very point so I am not sure what you are trying to contradict. You seem to suggest that "inherent bias" is really just inchoate prejudice to be tamed and managed.

What is the real difference between you saying "everyone has inherent bias" and me saying everyone is prejudicial (to varying degrees I would add)?

Faugheen

cms88 wrote: »

Go back a few pages. It's pretty simple to do to be fair.

Or you can stop wasting everybody’s time and help.

If you want people to respect and listen to your point of view then antagonising everyone isn’t exactly going to help your case.

cms88

Faugheen wrote: »

Or you can stop wasting everybody’s time and help.

If you want people to respect and listen to your point of view then antagonising everyone isn’t exactly going to help your case.

Of if they're really that worried they can go and find it themselves could they not?

ohnonotgmail

partyguinness wrote: »

...but if feel the need to learn to acknowledge and control the urge to be prejudicial then you are acknowledging that very prejudice must exist in the first place....which is my very point so I am not sure what you are trying to contradict. You seem to suggest that "inherent bias" is really just inchoate prejudice to be tamed and managed.

What is the real difference between you saying "everyone has inherent bias" and me saying everyone is prejudicial (to varying degrees I would add)?

shrugging your shoulders and saying that everyone is prejudiced is just giving a free pass to those that act on those prejudices.

Antares35

cms88 wrote: »

Go back a few pages. It's pretty simple to do to be fair.

I have. All I see is your mental gymnastics and pedantry over another posters typo.

Brian?

partyguinness wrote: »

...but if feel the need to learn to acknowledge and control the urge to be prejudicial then you are acknowledging that very prejudice must exist in the first place....which is my very point so I am not sure what you are trying to contradict. You seem to suggest that "inherent bias" is really just inchoate prejudice to be tamed and managed.

What is the real difference between you saying "everyone has inherent bias" and me saying everyone is prejudicial (to varying degrees I would add)?

The difference to be is that prejudice is an act and bias is a thought, IMO.

We all think things we don't do and acting on our bias should be one of them. If you acknowledge your own bias and don't let it change your decision then I don't think you are being prejudiced

Faugheen

cms88 wrote: »

Of if they're really that worried they can go and find it themselves could they not?

Or you could help in case people missed it.

That’s what people who debate in good faith do rather than this pissing contest that you are so eager to engage in.

Also, by saying you have already answered it, then surely you actually knew what the poster was asking but you engaged in nonsense over the typo anyway. Thanks for confirming that.

partyguinness

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

shrugging your shoulders and saying that everyone is prejudiced is just giving a free pass to those that act on those prejudices.

No it is not. Acknowledging prejudice or racism for that matter exists in everyone does not equate to acceptance or a "free pass". That is just weird.

I am honest enough to admit that IMO...everyone is prejudice to a varying degree or "inherently bias" as another poster put it. It does not amount to some sort of strange acceptance - I accept that it exists but that acceptance should not be confused with saying "Ah sure that's grand."

Anyone who says they are not remotely prejudicial or inherently bias in any manner whatsoever is nothing but a God damn liar.

ohnonotgmail

partyguinness wrote: »

No it is not. Acknowledging prejudice or racism for that matter exists in everyone does not equate to acceptance or a "free pass". That is just weird.

I am honest enough to admit that IMO...everyone is prejudice to a varying degree or "inherently bias" as another poster put it. It does not amount to some sort of strange acceptance - I accept that it exists but that acceptance should not be confused with saying "Ah sure that's grand."

Anyone who says they are not remotely prejudicial or inherently bias in any manner whatsoever is nothing but a God damn liar.

you, Brian? and myself are all in agreement then.

partyguinness

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you, Brian? and myself are all in agreement then.

I have not read your comments but I think Brian and I are in fact arguing the same point but using a different turn of phrase.

Brian?

partyguinness wrote: »

I have not read your comments but I think Brian and I are in fact arguing the same point but using a different turn of phrase.

I think so too

Necro

Can we move on from the typo please folks. cms88 if you aren't going to explain the point of your post why bring it up in the first place, drop it now and move on

cms88

Faugheen wrote: »

Or you could help in case people missed it.

That’s what people who debate in good faith do rather than this pissing contest that you are so eager to engage in.

Also, by saying you have already answered it, then surely you actually knew what the poster was asking but you engaged in nonsense over the typo anyway. Thanks for confirming that.

What was after they said it was a typo sp what' the problem there? Again if people are that worried they can find it themselves could they not?

It's not really my problem if posters chose to ignore where i've already explained something is it?

cms88

Necro wrote: »

Can we move on from the typo please folks. cms88 if you aren't going to explain the point of your post why bring it up in the first place, drop it now and move on

Again it's already been explained. Not my problem if people don't want to look at it is it?

Jeremy Sproket

Motor insurance is "essentially" mandatory in all but name for a large cohort of Ireland due to our dire public transport system or for elderly or disabled people living in isolated areas not covered by public transport. As such, third party only motor insurance should be available from a state body to keep the private companies on their toes.

The aforementioned will stop gouging by insurance companies. I know an elderly lady who had her car adapted due to a disability and she was fleeced because she "modified" her car.

Insurance NCB should be reversed, ie, everyone starts out on a reasonable price and it only goes up when you claim. IE, no starting out on ridiculous €3-4k per anum.

Payouts for "whiplash" should be abolished and replaced with free physio sessions and engagement in care. Payouts should only be given to people who are genuinely out of pocket ie, self employed and hourly paid workers who won't have an income due to a "genuine" injury.
People who draw a salary and who get guaranteed sick pay, ie, a lot of civil servants and most private sector salaried workers should be told to scram.

Faking whiplash or injuries should result in imprisonment.

beakerjoe

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

Motor insurance is "essentially" mandatory in all but name for a large cohort of Ireland due to our dire public transport system or for elderly or disabled people living in isolated areas not covered by public transport. As such, third party only motor insurance should be available from a state body to keep the private companies on their toes.

The aforementioned will stop gouging by insurance companies. I know an elderly lady who had her car adapted due to a disability and she was fleeced because she "modified" her car.

Insurance NCB should be reversed, ie, everyone starts out on a reasonable price and it only goes up when you claim. IE, no starting out on ridiculous €3-4k per anum.

Payouts for "whiplash" should be abolished and replaced with free physio sessions and engagement in care. Payouts should only be given to people who are genuinely out of pocket ie, self employed and hourly paid workers who won't have an income due to a "genuine" injury.
People who draw a salary and who get guaranteed sick pay, ie, a lot of civil servants and most private sector salaried workers should be told to scram.

Faking whiplash or injuries should result in imprisonment.

Is that an unpopular opinion?

FileNotFound

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

Motor insurance is "essentially" mandatory in all but name for a large cohort of Ireland due to our dire public transport system or for elderly or disabled people living in isolated areas not covered by public transport. As such, third party only motor insurance should be available from a state body to keep the private companies on their toes.

The aforementioned will stop gouging by insurance companies. I know an elderly lady who had her car adapted due to a disability and she was fleeced because she "modified" her car.

Insurance NCB should be reversed, ie, everyone starts out on a reasonable price and it only goes up when you claim. IE, no starting out on ridiculous €3-4k per anum.

Payouts for "whiplash" should be abolished and replaced with free physio sessions and engagement in care. Payouts should only be given to people who are genuinely out of pocket ie, self employed and hourly paid workers who won't have an income due to a "genuine" injury.
People who draw a salary and who get guaranteed sick pay, ie, a lot of civil servants and most private sector salaried workers should be told to scram.

Faking whiplash or injuries should result in imprisonment.

Think you got mixed up.

This is not the Popular opinions thread.

But seriously you make some valid points that should really be looked into.

Potential-Monke

Jeremy Sproket wrote: »

People who draw a salary and who get guaranteed sick pay, ie, a lot of civil servants and most private sector salaried workers should be told to scram.

I agree with everything, but I would amend that part to have it above a certain ceiling. Depending on the role, you may get guaranteed sick pay, but it's no forever and usually has strict limits which have a rolling expiry. All well and good for short injuries, but something bigger or with reoccurring issues would eliminate the sick pay and you'd end up out with no pay. Again, grand to those on huge wages, but not everyone with guaranteed sick pay is on big money.

My unpopular opinion today: I couldn't give 2 continental craps about what is happening over in Israel, and I believe it has nothing to do with Ireland or the Irish people, so we shouldn't be getting involved in any way.

McGinniesta

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I agree with everything, but I would amend that part to have it above a certain ceiling. Depending on the role, you may get guaranteed sick pay, but it's no forever and usually has strict limits which have a rolling expiry. All well and good for short injuries, but something bigger or with reoccurring issues would eliminate the sick pay and you'd end up out with no pay. Again, grand to those on huge wages, but not everyone with guaranteed sick pay is on big money.

My unpopular opinion today: I couldn't give 2 continental craps about what is happening over in Israel, and I believe it has nothing to do with Ireland or the Irish people, so we shouldn't be getting involved in any way.

Part of the problem is that there is nobody else getting involved.

lazygal

Anyone who thinks putting a 'right' to something like housing or water into the Constitution in order to solve a problem is very, very dim.

FileNotFound

lazygal wrote: »

Anyone who thinks putting a 'right' to something like housing or water into the Constitution in order to solve a problem is very, very dim.

They definitely lack a little in the mental capacity and common sense departments.

Even sadder when you see politicians playing on their stupidity.

Iscreamkone

To the people who say that they have a right to water this is my response.
Yes, you have a right to water. Get a big water container, put it on your head and walk to your nearest river or lake. Fill the said water container, put in back on your head and walk home. You should be allowed to keep this water.
If you would like it cleaned and delivered to your house, and the dirty water taken away after being used from your house, then this will cost.



And btw, the containers aren't free either

Potential-Monke

McGinniesta wrote: »

Part of the problem is that there is nobody else getting involved.

Maybe it's not as unpopular as I thought so!

The Bends is the best Radiohead album.