| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 18:17 - Feb 16 with 1788 views | reusersfreekicks |
| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 15:01 - Feb 16 by SWBlue22 |
Absolutely he's not wrong. Well said JD Vance. |
Streuth they are here amongst us.
Bet you despised Churchill for his efforts fighting the lovely Hitler and Mussolini, whose path Trump etc Al are following in |  | |  |
| I was talking to..... on 18:25 - Feb 16 with 1746 views | reusersfreekicks |
| I was talking to..... on 14:25 - Feb 16 by J2BLUE |
As you asked so nicely.
For many years now this board has had two groups of posters who don't really agree on much politically and perhaps socially. It's a delicate balance. With GB gone and the other side growing in number by the week the board is now not much fun. To join that side it seems you have to leave your personality at the door and become a dour joyless member of the TWTD board police demanding answers and treating the board like it's the House of Commons. It's been sad to see a number of previously excellent posters get radicalised and patrol the board looking for things to be offended by.
They also have an excellent propaganda department where they frequently project their own actions on to the rest of us. The classic being the 'running to Phil' line while they are running to Phil and waving the imaginary yellow cards.
I realise some won't agree but you asked so I answered.
I now wait for the inevitable 12 responses from that side who will completely rewrite history and then pat each other on the back. Bingo card at the ready for all the buzzwords. I'll take disingenuous as my free square.
 |
I don't know if you see me in that group that leaves it's personality at the door. It's not something I recognise in myself.
I'm not even left wing really so chuckle when I see myself blindly chucked in that lazy grouping.
However I am really very worried about the way the world is going. The advent of an undiluted Trump changes everything and is likely to lead to less freedoms, more authoritarianism and in general less protection for those who can't stick up gor themselves. Imo this should be a major concern for all but the most extreme right wing/bully types.
And where I see this threat rationalised or enabled I speak up.
That is all | | | |
| I was talking to..... on 18:25 - Feb 16 with 1715 views | lowhouseblue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:12 - Feb 16 by NewcyBlue |
The problem is that being tolerant of intolerance just allows intolerance to grow and become more acceptable in society.
Where do you do draw the line?
Is the U.K. law enough? Should it be harsher? Should there be more education about freedom of speech not meaning the freedom of consequence?
It could easily cascade, and JD Vance deliberately stated something as factual incorrectly. At what point do we hold politicians to account over such inaccuracies, keeping in mind the political views that they hold.
It is all well and good being a critic of intolerance, but tolerating intolerant beliefs is a poorer way to conduct one’s self. |
personally i think the uk law is in a good place. incitement of violence or hatred and harassment are rightly crimes. in other settings (education, employment etc) the law generally provides for a balancing exercise between the rights of the speakers and genuine harms to the rights of others. any restrictions have to be proportionate to that balance. i said earlier, i think the 100m exclusion of protests around abortion clinics is an entirely appropriate example of balancing rights and harms.
educating people about both the legal limits to free speech and the reputational and other risks they may be taking, along with the importance of freedom of belief and freedom of expression as fundamental human rights, would be great.
people who say or write things that are untrue should be challenged. much of the press does that; other politicians do that. but i don't see that the law or the state can police political debates, that becomes political censorship. |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 18:25 - Feb 16 with 1737 views | pointofblue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:12 - Feb 16 by NewcyBlue |
The problem is that being tolerant of intolerance just allows intolerance to grow and become more acceptable in society.
Where do you do draw the line?
Is the U.K. law enough? Should it be harsher? Should there be more education about freedom of speech not meaning the freedom of consequence?
It could easily cascade, and JD Vance deliberately stated something as factual incorrectly. At what point do we hold politicians to account over such inaccuracies, keeping in mind the political views that they hold.
It is all well and good being a critic of intolerance, but tolerating intolerant beliefs is a poorer way to conduct one’s self. |
I think the problem is the intolerant right has cornered the victim market. Stand up for minorities, and the response tends to be that people are not allowed to speak, even though criticism itself is a representation of free speech. The choice appears to be let it grow,which would allow more people to hear it and think it's acceptable, or vocally criticise and have them go down the "poor me" route, which has been very successful. There appears to be no answer to successfully dilute the approach which has taken hold. |  |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 18:29 - Feb 16 with 1704 views | Clapham_Junction |
| I was talking to..... on 17:39 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
but my politics haven't changed at all. i've just got more and more bored by the group think that passes for the left clique on here. i promise i have always been a critic of intolerance, simplistic cliches, and illiberal attitudes - there is just so much more of it than there used to be. the illiberalism genuinely worries me if i'm honest - i do fear that with farage on one side and this on the other we may be heading to a very bad place. |
Your assessment of the 'left clique' effectively seems to consist of anyone to the left of the rightward fringes of the Tory party.
And why do you feel the need to refer to people as a clique? You don't seem to be able to get through a debate without resorting to snide attacks on other posters. |  | | |
| I was talking to..... on 18:35 - Feb 16 with 1634 views | lowhouseblue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:25 - Feb 16 by pointofblue |
I think the problem is the intolerant right has cornered the victim market. Stand up for minorities, and the response tends to be that people are not allowed to speak, even though criticism itself is a representation of free speech. The choice appears to be let it grow,which would allow more people to hear it and think it's acceptable, or vocally criticise and have them go down the "poor me" route, which has been very successful. There appears to be no answer to successfully dilute the approach which has taken hold. |
i don't think that's right. if you disagree with someone, criticise what they say, challenge their arguments, provide evidence, and convince others of your case through reason and logic. don't name call, don't stereotype, don't exaggerate. no one can "go down the "poor me" route" if you do that. trying to stop people hearing stuff will never work. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 18:38 - Feb 16 with 1616 views | lowhouseblue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:29 - Feb 16 by Clapham_Junction |
Your assessment of the 'left clique' effectively seems to consist of anyone to the left of the rightward fringes of the Tory party.
And why do you feel the need to refer to people as a clique? You don't seem to be able to get through a debate without resorting to snide attacks on other posters. |
oh come on, i've had half a dozen people ganging up on me for the past 24 hours. i genuinely couldn't care less, but if it quacks like a clique and waddles like a clique then it's a clique.
in terms of snide attacks read what gets posted at me. i don't care but let's have a little bit of balance eh. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 18:41 - Feb 16 with 1624 views | NewcyBlue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:25 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
personally i think the uk law is in a good place. incitement of violence or hatred and harassment are rightly crimes. in other settings (education, employment etc) the law generally provides for a balancing exercise between the rights of the speakers and genuine harms to the rights of others. any restrictions have to be proportionate to that balance. i said earlier, i think the 100m exclusion of protests around abortion clinics is an entirely appropriate example of balancing rights and harms.
educating people about both the legal limits to free speech and the reputational and other risks they may be taking, along with the importance of freedom of belief and freedom of expression as fundamental human rights, would be great.
people who say or write things that are untrue should be challenged. much of the press does that; other politicians do that. but i don't see that the law or the state can police political debates, that becomes political censorship. |
Freedom of belief and freedom of expression of said beliefs don’t go hand in hand.
People can hold whatever beliefs they wish, however, that does not mean that they can express those beliefs without challenge or consequence.
People feel that they are entitled to air their views without consequence and that’s adding fuel to the fire. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 18:45 - Feb 16 with 1591 views | Kropotkin123 |
| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 09:37 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
ok then, it's the shouty intolerant left on here who go around as a little gang, if that's clearer. but for me this thread has been genuinely eye-opening and a little bit scary. even if they don't represent anything more than their unique little gang, the narrow and intolerant thinking has surprised me. i clearly live in a very liberal bubble where free speech and debate are championed and no one questions the sway of the echr or the validity of a human rights based order. i'm used to the tories and farage wanting to draw back on the right to family life, but the right to freedom of belief and freedom of expression have always been sacrosanct. it's a very scary world we're heading towards. |
No, it's some people that hold a different opinion to you. Not "the shout left", it includes people who demonstrate options from the left and the centre that disagree with you.
Fwiw, as someone who neither agrees nor disagrees with you position on human rights, the way you specifically articulate them and who you choose to defend and posts where you have been absent from doesn't correlated to living in a liberal bubble.
It actually comes across as disingenuous, like you don't care about human rights and only want to use them to defend obnoxious and hateful speech.
The way you display shock when people talk about nuances adds to this disingenuous feel to your posts on human rights. As does creating the left as a straw man to rally against.
Now that may not be your intention. I don't know you or your motivations. But if you genuinely care about advancing or protecting human rights, then seeing a more even distribution of who's human rights you are prepared to go to this level to defend, working within the nuances of debate, and debating the issue not fictitious groups would help your case.
In relation to the issue itself, it doesn't shock me that people on the left, centre or right justify limiting the speech of others because it isn't a left right issue. It is an up down issue. Authority Vs liberty, not cooperation Vs competition. [Post edited 16 Feb 19:04]
|  |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 18:46 - Feb 16 with 1574 views | Herbivore |
| I was talking to..... on 18:35 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
i don't think that's right. if you disagree with someone, criticise what they say, challenge their arguments, provide evidence, and convince others of your case through reason and logic. don't name call, don't stereotype, don't exaggerate. no one can "go down the "poor me" route" if you do that. trying to stop people hearing stuff will never work. |
I think again this is a very idealistic and naive take. You can reason with people, you can offer them evidence, but we're firmly in a post-truth era and lots of people don't care about facts and evidence anymore. If people don't want to engage in debate, don't want to talk about or offer evidence, then how exactly do you begin the debate, let alone win it? |  |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 18:48 - Feb 16 with 1562 views | reusersfreekicks |
| I was talking to..... on 18:38 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
oh come on, i've had half a dozen people ganging up on me for the past 24 hours. i genuinely couldn't care less, but if it quacks like a clique and waddles like a clique then it's a clique.
in terms of snide attacks read what gets posted at me. i don't care but let's have a little bit of balance eh. |
You've had people disagreeing with you including myself. Hardly ganging up! Goodness knows how many times people have tried to explain their concerns and fears re the way Trump Vance et al are going. V little if anything has been said re his right to say it. But you steadfastly ignore all context and current information to repeat accusations re desires to limit free speech.
Bit like if someone is about to set your house on fire and insisting that the matches used pass legal safety standards. | | | |
| I was talking to..... on 18:57 - Feb 16 with 1506 views | Clapham_Junction |
| I was talking to..... on 18:38 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
oh come on, i've had half a dozen people ganging up on me for the past 24 hours. i genuinely couldn't care less, but if it quacks like a clique and waddles like a clique then it's a clique.
in terms of snide attacks read what gets posted at me. i don't care but let's have a little bit of balance eh. |
They were responding to your posts, not 'ganging up' on you. This sort of claim is very reminiscent of several former posters who have exhausted Phil's patience over the years.
Your supposed 'left clique' consists of people with a range of political outlooks. Constantly attacking people who disagree with you and (almost always) tagging on the 'left' label is only one step away from shouting 'Marxism' at everything you disagree with. | | | |
| I was talking to..... on 19:02 - Feb 16 with 1484 views | Kropotkin123 |
| I was talking to..... on 12:58 - Feb 16 by J2BLUE |
The balance of the forum has been all wrong since GB was banned. |
Didn't know they'd been banned. A real shame. I believe they were an important voice on many subjects. Not someone I'd always agree with, but someone I felt confident that if I disagreed with them they wouldn't feel the need to hold it against me. Surprised they are one that have gone, though I evidently don't know the catalyst. | |
| Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top. | | Poll: | Would you rather | | Blog: | Round Four: Eagle |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 19:03 - Feb 16 with 1475 views | Swansea_Blue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:25 - Feb 16 by reusersfreekicks |
I don't know if you see me in that group that leaves it's personality at the door. It's not something I recognise in myself.
I'm not even left wing really so chuckle when I see myself blindly chucked in that lazy grouping.
However I am really very worried about the way the world is going. The advent of an undiluted Trump changes everything and is likely to lead to less freedoms, more authoritarianism and in general less protection for those who can't stick up gor themselves. Imo this should be a major concern for all but the most extreme right wing/bully types.
And where I see this threat rationalised or enabled I speak up.
That is all |
Isn’t it bizarre that you’re viewed as left wing for opposing the populist authoritarianism we see from the likes of Trump. ‘Having some decency’ would be a more suitable label. As you say, very lazy and a product of the tribal ‘culture wars’, for want of a better word. Someone mentioned GB above. Nobody could accuse him as being a lefty, but he’s no doubt appalled at what’s happening with Trump/Musk/Vance. This should transcend political loyalties.
(A bit poor of J2 to put out a generic smear. I’m a bit surprised, as he’s normally a very astute and impartial poster, doesn’t get drawn into the tit for tat nonsense and certainly someone I respect on here. It would have helped to either have specifics or not say anything). |  |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 19:13 - Feb 16 with 1392 views | StokieBlue |
| I was talking to..... on 18:38 - Feb 16 by lowhouseblue |
oh come on, i've had half a dozen people ganging up on me for the past 24 hours. i genuinely couldn't care less, but if it quacks like a clique and waddles like a clique then it's a clique.
in terms of snide attacks read what gets posted at me. i don't care but let's have a little bit of balance eh. |
Incorrect.
You've not had half a dozen people gang up on you. You've had half a dozen people get annoyed at your nonsense and point out where you're wrong.
Totally different things and poor form to suggest otherwise.
SB |  | | |
| I was talking to..... on 19:16 - Feb 16 with 1362 views | Swansea_Blue |
| I was talking to..... on 19:02 - Feb 16 by Kropotkin123 |
Didn't know they'd been banned. A real shame. I believe they were an important voice on many subjects. Not someone I'd always agree with, but someone I felt confident that if I disagreed with them they wouldn't feel the need to hold it against me. Surprised they are one that have gone, though I evidently don't know the catalyst. |
100%
I miss GB. He annoyed me at times (like doubling down on Boris’ bus lie being the truth lol, TWTD), but he wouldn't sacrifice his principles for the sake of political tribalism. Went in a bit heavy on Dollers, but pulled out of the challenge with a quick edit and I don’t think there was any intent to endanger the safety of his opponent. Phil went early and did a Rob Jones where a yellow card would have sufficed imo.
But this isn’t my site and I can imagine poor Phil has continuous headaches dealing with some of us. So I won’t be appealing the decision! | |
| |
| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 19:26 - Feb 16 with 1304 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
I think that Lowers seeming to see himself as the moderate, center ground, 'sensible' voice on all things is all we need to know about the relentless drift to the right in society. |  |
| |
| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 19:31 - Feb 16 with 1279 views | SWBlue22 |
| JD Vance being somewhat rude to his hosts on 18:17 - Feb 16 by reusersfreekicks |
Streuth they are here amongst us.
Bet you despised Churchill for his efforts fighting the lovely Hitler and Mussolini, whose path Trump etc Al are following in |
Wow what a predictable response. |  | | |
| I was talking to..... on 19:39 - Feb 16 with 1249 views | StokieBlue |
| I was talking to..... on 19:16 - Feb 16 by Swansea_Blue |
100%
I miss GB. He annoyed me at times (like doubling down on Boris’ bus lie being the truth lol, TWTD), but he wouldn't sacrifice his principles for the sake of political tribalism. Went in a bit heavy on Dollers, but pulled out of the challenge with a quick edit and I don’t think there was any intent to endanger the safety of his opponent. Phil went early and did a Rob Jones where a yellow card would have sufficed imo.
But this isn’t my site and I can imagine poor Phil has continuous headaches dealing with some of us. So I won’t be appealing the decision! |
I'm getting a bit bored of this narrative being pushed, not a dig at you Swanners but more the fact many didn't see what was going on.
He's gone heavy on a lot of people a lot of times, he's had to apologise to me numerous times and to be honest even after that he continued. Why not ask Phil why he banned him rather than constructing a narrative on the forums?
As for the Dolly incident, he went far more than heavy, realised he was in trouble so deleted it, then posted it again then deleted it again. He did this all the time, the attack then delete methodology was an often seen playbook.
People have been banned for far less than what GB did on a regular basis. Being a long term poster doesn't give you the right to provoke, poke, belittle and in the end attack other posters.
If he comes back after some reflection a new and improved person then so be it but this painting of him as the victim is ridiculous.
SB | | | |
| I was talking to..... on 19:45 - Feb 16 with 1204 views | StokieBlue |
| I was talking to..... on 19:39 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
I'm getting a bit bored of this narrative being pushed, not a dig at you Swanners but more the fact many didn't see what was going on.
He's gone heavy on a lot of people a lot of times, he's had to apologise to me numerous times and to be honest even after that he continued. Why not ask Phil why he banned him rather than constructing a narrative on the forums?
As for the Dolly incident, he went far more than heavy, realised he was in trouble so deleted it, then posted it again then deleted it again. He did this all the time, the attack then delete methodology was an often seen playbook.
People have been banned for far less than what GB did on a regular basis. Being a long term poster doesn't give you the right to provoke, poke, belittle and in the end attack other posters.
If he comes back after some reflection a new and improved person then so be it but this painting of him as the victim is ridiculous.
SB |
Did you know that Jupiter isn't made of cheese?
It also has 95 moons.
SB [Post edited 16 Feb 20:37]
| | | |
| I was talking to..... on 19:46 - Feb 16 with 1180 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| I was talking to..... on 18:41 - Feb 16 by NewcyBlue |
Freedom of belief and freedom of expression of said beliefs don’t go hand in hand.
People can hold whatever beliefs they wish, however, that does not mean that they can express those beliefs without challenge or consequence.
People feel that they are entitled to air their views without consequence and that’s adding fuel to the fire. |
Agree with this but would go further by saying that expressing certain views need to be made illegal e.g. Holocaust denial, support for pedophilary, etc. Being called out is not sufficient in these cases. |  | | |
| I was talking to..... on 19:50 - Feb 16 with 1148 views | Swansea_Blue |
| I was talking to..... on 19:39 - Feb 16 by StokieBlue |
I'm getting a bit bored of this narrative being pushed, not a dig at you Swanners but more the fact many didn't see what was going on.
He's gone heavy on a lot of people a lot of times, he's had to apologise to me numerous times and to be honest even after that he continued. Why not ask Phil why he banned him rather than constructing a narrative on the forums?
As for the Dolly incident, he went far more than heavy, realised he was in trouble so deleted it, then posted it again then deleted it again. He did this all the time, the attack then delete methodology was an often seen playbook.
People have been banned for far less than what GB did on a regular basis. Being a long term poster doesn't give you the right to provoke, poke, belittle and in the end attack other posters.
If he comes back after some reflection a new and improved person then so be it but this painting of him as the victim is ridiculous.
SB |
That’s fair enough. I’ve not been on the end of anything, so I’m looking in from the outside without any skin in the game. I can understand why you’d feel differently. Edit - and implicit in that, I could easily be wrong - wouldn’t be the first time lol! [Post edited 16 Feb 19:57]
| |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 20:17 - Feb 16 with 1056 views | Bigalhunter |
| I was talking to..... on 14:42 - Feb 16 by positivity |
this looks fun! is the "bore off" square taken? failing that, i'll go for "move on" |
This
Be nice
#legend
Balls
Returning poster
Well said
Bad faith player |  |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 21:00 - Feb 16 with 917 views | J2BLUE |
| I was talking to..... on 19:03 - Feb 16 by Swansea_Blue |
Isn’t it bizarre that you’re viewed as left wing for opposing the populist authoritarianism we see from the likes of Trump. ‘Having some decency’ would be a more suitable label. As you say, very lazy and a product of the tribal ‘culture wars’, for want of a better word. Someone mentioned GB above. Nobody could accuse him as being a lefty, but he’s no doubt appalled at what’s happening with Trump/Musk/Vance. This should transcend political loyalties.
(A bit poor of J2 to put out a generic smear. I’m a bit surprised, as he’s normally a very astute and impartial poster, doesn’t get drawn into the tit for tat nonsense and certainly someone I respect on here. It would have helped to either have specifics or not say anything). |
I've been specific in the past.
I don't want it to end up in a full scale slanging match where Phil has to come on here on a Sunday and play teacher. We're all adults.
From that post it's pretty clear you don't see everything. Not a criticism, you probably have better things to do but smear implies what i'm saying isn't true.
This site needs an ignore function fit for purpose. That would take some work and I don't expect it for free. Happy to pay either one off or a subscription for a proper ignore function. It would solve a lot of issues. |  |
| |
| I was talking to..... on 21:13 - Feb 16 with 839 views | Herbivore |
| I was talking to..... on 21:00 - Feb 16 by J2BLUE |
I've been specific in the past.
I don't want it to end up in a full scale slanging match where Phil has to come on here on a Sunday and play teacher. We're all adults.
From that post it's pretty clear you don't see everything. Not a criticism, you probably have better things to do but smear implies what i'm saying isn't true.
This site needs an ignore function fit for purpose. That would take some work and I don't expect it for free. Happy to pay either one off or a subscription for a proper ignore function. It would solve a lot of issues. |
What you're saying is your perspective. Other perspectives are available. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
