PDA

View Full Version : Israel and "catchcry" thread etc



Alan Shore
28-09-2004, 11:30 AM
FFS, why did you include option 7? That's really irresponsible as a moderator.

Rincewind
28-09-2004, 01:20 PM
FFS, why did you include option 7? That's really irresponsible as a moderator.

I didn't want to disenfrancise AC.

Kevin, Jenni or Jeo can moderate #7 if they think it necessary. But that is part of the reason I posted this on the OT forum. Greater liberty is given here in general.

Kevin Bonham
28-09-2004, 07:35 PM
FFS, why did you include option 7? That's really irresponsible as a moderator.

No it isn't.

Alan Shore
28-09-2004, 09:03 PM
No it isn't.

There's enough shit heaped upon Israel as it is. It's pretty upsetting at times for a couple of friends of mine, so forgive me if I think it's offensive. I wouldn't expect you to understand Bonham, you have as much empathy as a soulless leech.

JGB
28-09-2004, 09:17 PM
There's enough shit heaped upon Israel as it is. It's pretty upsetting at times for a couple of friends of mine, so forgive me if I think it's offensive. I wouldn't expect you to understand Bonham, you have as much empathy as a soulless leech.

Someones fired up!

As a matter of fact the comment 'its Israel's fault' can be seen in another light; as many peope are blaming Isreal for so many different things why not this also. (it is a matter of interpretation)

Kevin Bonham
28-09-2004, 10:08 PM
There's enough shit heaped upon Israel as it is. It's pretty upsetting at times for a couple of friends of mine, so forgive me if I think it's offensive. I wouldn't expect you to understand Bonham, you have as much empathy as a soulless leech.

I certainly have no empathy with anyone silly enough to claim that a casual mention of the Israel issue that actually takes the mickey out of the forum's most obsessive anti-Zionist equates with heaping ordure upon said nation.

:rolleyes:

Alan Shore
28-09-2004, 11:07 PM
I certainly have no empathy with anyone silly enough to claim that a casual mention of the Israel issue that actually takes the mickey out of the forum's most obsessive anti-Zionist equates with heaping ordure upon said nation.

:rolleyes:

I don't think it was Barry's intention to stir at all, almost certainly it wasn't. However, it is still a monument to offensiveness. Naturally you in your detached way of viewing the world wouldn't be able to understand this. It's one thing for antichrist to say whatever because no one really listens but it still advocates the sentiments of what I described above. So it is not silly at all as you casually dismiss, like the uncaring entity you are. I would almost accuse you of double standards, allowing this to stand while deleting Sweeney's comical jibes. This is my final word, if it stands or not, I do not like it but I refuse to get drawn into another pointless debate with you Kevin.

Garvinator
28-09-2004, 11:25 PM
It is my opinion that the reference to Israel should be deleted. It is irrelevant and can be viewed as offensive. The question asked is in no way affected by deleting the reference to israel.

Kevin Bonham
28-09-2004, 11:40 PM
I don't think it was Barry's intention to stir at all, almost certainly it wasn't. However, it is still a monument to offensiveness. Naturally you in your detached way of viewing the world wouldn't be able to understand this.

It's not a question of detachment, it's a question of actually thinking about what someone has written. Israel-Palestine is not an issue I am personally close to in the way your friends are, but there are issues I am personally close to. When those issues come up, I might be quite passionate about them, but I'm reasonably capable of spotting an obvious joke. For instance, I'm an atheist, but when John Safran did his little rant about all the atheists who aren't smart enough to be atheists, I didn't get offended, I thought it was funny.

Being personally involved with an issue is no excuse for not making some attempt to understand what someone's saying or to even consider the possibility that someone's joking. Especially when you had the explanatory note to help you out.


It's one thing for antichrist to say whatever because no one really listens but it still advocates the sentiments of what I described above.

No it doesn't. :hand:

If you can find it, I strongly recommend you read the (very funny) chapter dealing with David Icke and his Reptoids gibberish in Jon Ronson's "Them: Adventures with Extremists". It's a very nice salutory lesson about people who go around looking for anti-semitism in places where it may not actually be. There's enough of the real deal for those concerned to worry about without making more of it up.


So it is not silly at all as you casually dismiss, like the uncaring entity you are. I would almost accuse you of double standards, allowing this to stand while deleting Sweeney's comical jibes.

I hope this garbage is just a poor attempt to troll. Many things that Sweeney has said that have been potentially offensive in all kinds of ways have been allowed to stand- the issue is with crudity, which is controlled on this site. As, by the way, is material that is seriously racist.

Besides, any attempt to accuse me of double standards between my moderation and my posting would be feeble and pointless. In one capacity I am speaking my mind and in the other I am performing an agreed function on behalf of the admins. Even if you could demonstrate a genuine double standard, which I strongly suspect is way beyond you anyway, so what?


This is my final word, if it stands or not, I do not like it but I refuse to get drawn into another pointless debate with you Kevin.

Hmm, I wonder why not.

You have no-one but yourself to blame for this one and would commence any such debate in a -/+ position.

Rincewind
29-09-2004, 12:14 AM
In the words of Homer Simspon, "Help me, Bajesus!"

The whole poll was satirical and #7 was purely added to lampoon antichrist. If you can't see that there is no helping you.

As the language is not villifying, the only thing you can be objecting to is the idea. Since the idea is obvious satire then I fail to see how any reasonable person could be offended. I'm sorry if anyone was offended but I don't think it was my resonsibility not to offend them. Really the only one who should be offended is Peter but I doubt he will call me to task on it.

I chose to not censor myself. AISB, if one of the other admins feels I've crossed the line, then I guess they will take action. It doesn't look like KB is so inclined perhaps you could try your luck with Jenni or Jeo.

When I posted the poll I wondered if it might start some interesting debate. I really didn't expect anything quite as banal as this.

Garvinator
29-09-2004, 12:18 AM
even though i did say that i think the reference to israel should be deleted, i did laugh when i read the options and was thinking of voting for the israel option as i dont think any of the others are good either ;)

Alan Shore
29-09-2004, 12:41 AM
Lines of masturbation

Bottom line: No empathy, only self-righteous arrogance.

And no, sorry, you are wrong regarding the Sweeney jibes as there is no distinction between the two - the intent may have been different yet the result was the same. The KB challenge is for you now to shut up and admit you have no clue.


It is my opinion that the reference to Israel should be deleted. It is irrelevant and can be viewed as offensive. The question asked is in no way affected by deleting the reference to israel.

100% correct. I do find it offensive, it serves no positive by remaining, hence it should be edited, not a difficult task to maintain some decency.


The whole poll was satirical and #7 was purely added to lampoon antichrist. If you can't see that there is no helping you.

Baz, I know it was, I already said above, I doubted it was your intention, however there may be other forum readers, not just me who would be offended. Just asking for a bit of PC.

Bill Gletsos
29-09-2004, 12:59 AM
Just asking for a bit of PC.
And on that reason alone it should be rejected.

PC is just pure and simple BS.

Kevin Bonham
29-09-2004, 01:07 AM
Actually, BD, your L.O.M. call was l-a-m-e - it was completely out of the original context in which the term was used.

Indeed, the one who could be best accused of L.O.M. here is demonstrably you - making unsubstantiated and puerile psychological accusations, ignoring the fact that a difference in intention is alone enough to scuttle your pathetic inconsistency half-calls, but above all writing this:


This is my final word, if it stands or not, I do not like it but I refuse to get drawn into another pointless debate with you Kevin.

... and not having the guts to stick with it for more than ninety-four minutes.

In my experience even the greenest high-school forum rookie unwisely saying they are quitting an argument will usually hold out somewhere between a day and three before caving in and responding. Weak effort.

:rolleyes:

antichrist
29-09-2004, 05:38 PM
Quote:
Lines of Peter Hanna masturbation

AC
In Blood on Hands it appears that the above live is attributed to me, I don't use such language and I think it is unfair that it appears as my quote.

In this thread it attributed to KB????

BY the way, say whatever you want about me, just as long as I get an apology from GC.

Bill Gletsos
29-09-2004, 05:46 PM
Quote:
Lines of Peter Hanna masturbation

AC
In Blood on Hands it appears that the above live is attributed to me, I don't use such language and I think it is unfair that it appears as my quote.

In this thread it attributed to KB????

BY the way, say whatever you want about me, just as long as I get an apology from GC.
You miss the point AC.

In both circumstances BD is referring to the posts of others as lines of masturbation, in the first case your posts and in the second Kevin's.

Garvinator
29-09-2004, 05:48 PM
Quote:
Lines of Peter Hanna masturbation

AC
In Blood on Hands it appears that the above live is attributed to me, I don't use such language and I think it is unfair that it appears as my quote.

In this thread it attributed to KB????

BY the way, say whatever you want about me, just as long as I get an apology from GC.
why havent you learnt to quote yet?

antichrist
29-09-2004, 05:54 PM
You miss the point AC.

In both circumstances BD is referring to the posts of others as lines of masturbation, in the first case your posts and in the second Kevin's.

I knew what he was getting at but it still doesn't appear right and appearances are important -- fancy that coming from me.

It's like when Matt changed that move after you had played the following half move making yours illegal or something like that. I only looked at your blast very quickly but that is what I thought you were getting at.

antichrist
29-09-2004, 06:03 PM
why havent you learnt to quote yet?

From previous post to the same fool who said:

"Learn to quote moron"

AC:
What did moron say so he/she can be quoted?

Moron says learn to punctuate(?)

_____________________________________
You only get one chance and you stuffed it.

Kevin Bonham
29-09-2004, 06:20 PM
What did moron say so he/she can be quoted?

What he means is that by using the "quote" button on a post you are referring to, the text you are quoting will appear in a form that makes it easier for others to see who is quoting who. If doing this, please delete those parts of others' texts you are not referring to.

As for the "lines of masturbation" line, it is unnecessarily coarse and there's probably a good call for banning it to stop BD from embarrassing himself by misusing it any further. :lol:

Rhubarb
29-09-2004, 06:35 PM
I don't use such language and I think it is unfair that it appears as my quote.

I was going to say that even though you don't know how to use the quote tags I agree that it is unfair for anyone to put words that you did not say inside a quote tag ...


BY the way, say whatever you want about me, just as long as I get an apology from GC.
... but i don't think I'll bother now. :P

antichrist
30-09-2004, 03:21 PM
What he means is that by using the "quote" button on a post you are referring to, the text you are quoting will appear in a form that makes it easier for others to see who is quoting who. If doing this, please delete those parts of others' texts you are not referring to.

As for the "lines of masturbation" line, it is unnecessarily coarse and there's probably a good call for banning it to stop BD from embarrassing himself by misusing it any further. :lol:

There are some situations where using quote button is not approp., I think if one is bringing in quotes from different posts, so I brake them up into portions.

Kevin Bonham
30-09-2004, 04:38 PM
There are some situations where using quote button is not approp., I think if one is bringing in quotes from different posts, so I brake them up into portions.

Actually quoting posts by different authors can be done in at least three ways:

(i) Open the thread in one window for each author you wish to quote, click quote on each post in a separate window, then copy and paste onto a single reply.

(ii) Write the quote tags manually, exactly copying the form that appears when you click on quote.

(iii) (Not as good as (i) and (ii)) Simply reply to each author in a different post.

You can always split up different quotes by the same author by using QUOTE and /QUOTE (in square brackets of course.) Does not matter if they are from different posts.

You have said before that you don't have much time when posting here so I understand if that's the problem, but sometimes it's really difficult to follow what's you talking and what's the other person.

arosar
30-09-2004, 04:41 PM
For a millionaire, antichrist is quite incompetent.

AR

Rincewind
30-09-2004, 04:50 PM
For a millionaire, antichrist is quite incompetent.

As in chess, there is no royal road to BB mastery. ;)

antichrist
01-10-2004, 10:40 AM
For a millionaire, antichrist is quite incompetent.

AR

Even with KB giving all the instructions I don't even feel like absorbing them and applying. Jealousy is a curse, as well mine (bb) is bigger than yours.