| Really... 21:41 - Sep 23 with 10190 views | PhilTWTD |
Getting tired of the sniping, trolling, winding up, dragging up threads from the past etc. Perhaps a bit more civility? |  | | |  |
| Exactly this…. on 11:00 - Sep 24 with 1571 views | LegendofthePhoenix |
| Exactly this…. on 09:23 - Sep 24 by hype313 |
I saw the post and exited, could tell where that one was going.
If that's Sitters view, then that's his prerogative, but just talk about that subject with your friends rather than post it on here.
Maybe he was bored. |
We're all human (I think, unless some of us are AIs) and we make mistakes.
A while back I made a mistake (not on here) and used a racial term. I'm an old guy, but I'm not a racist, far from it. But if you grew up in the 60s and 70s, there can be relics of terminology from that era and on that occasion a term came out without even thinking. What was noticeable was that younger generations were really outraged and angry, whereas people of my generation understood it was an unintended slip up and were willing to forgive. Accusations of being a racist or similar are pretty horrible when they are not true, in fact can be worse than the original offence. (n.b. there is a world of difference between a one off racial comment and being racist).
My point is, we are humans. We do make mistakes from time to time. I have huge respect for Phil and the site, and I think we all, as posters, have a responsibility to say a few calming words if we think a thread is getting too close to the line, and to try to take the heat out rather than inflame a situation, and to understand and be willing to forgive when someone makes a mistake and apologises. |  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 11:03 - Sep 24 with 1540 views | leitrimblue |
| Exactly this…. on 10:56 - Sep 24 by Benters |
The third set is those that are nice to you one minute then sneak a downie on you when your not looking.. |
Set up for a tap in there  |  | | |
| Exactly this…. on 11:07 - Sep 24 with 1496 views | Ryorry |
| Exactly this…. on 10:56 - Sep 24 by Benters |
The third set is those that are nice to you one minute then sneak a downie on you when your not looking.. |
That’s just going for the ball, not for the poster. |  |
| |
| According to…. on 11:16 - Sep 24 with 1432 views | Bloots |
| Exactly this…. on 10:41 - Sep 24 by Benters |
So these ‘usual suspects’ is there two sets of ‘Usual Suspect’ or one?
Shirley there has to be two,how about those that float between the two,so there must be three sets? |
….the usual suspects there are two sets of usual suspects.
But I suspect in reality there are an infinite number of usual suspects depending on what the subject is.
Although I suspect this is subject to debate.
Usually.
Who is Keyser Soze? |  |
| Keaton, Kint, McManus, Fenster and Hockney. |
| |
| According to…. on 11:20 - Sep 24 with 1400 views | _CliveBaker_ |
| According to…. on 11:16 - Sep 24 by Bloots |
….the usual suspects there are two sets of usual suspects.
But I suspect in reality there are an infinite number of usual suspects depending on what the subject is.
Although I suspect this is subject to debate.
Usually.
Who is Keyser Soze? |
Is it just me who hears a lot about usual suspects but has absolutely no idea who is meant to be in which camp? |  | | |
| That’s just because…. on 11:23 - Sep 24 with 1379 views | Bloots |
| According to…. on 11:20 - Sep 24 by _CliveBaker_ |
Is it just me who hears a lot about usual suspects but has absolutely no idea who is meant to be in which camp? |
….you aren’t one of the usual suspects.
You need to up your game matey!
(alternatively stay as you are, it’s preferable) | |
| Keaton, Kint, McManus, Fenster and Hockney. |
| |
| According to…. on 11:31 - Sep 24 with 1311 views | TheMoralMajority |
| According to…. on 11:20 - Sep 24 by _CliveBaker_ |
Is it just me who hears a lot about usual suspects but has absolutely no idea who is meant to be in which camp? |
If you can't identify the usual suspects, then you ARE a usual suspect. |  |
| 100% committed to Dear Leader Ham |
| |
| According to…. on 11:34 - Sep 24 with 1295 views | SE1blue |
| According to…. on 11:20 - Sep 24 by _CliveBaker_ |
Is it just me who hears a lot about usual suspects but has absolutely no idea who is meant to be in which camp? |
For me, and I say this with the greatest of respect to TWTD, it makes me sad that there are so many highly-educated and well-informed posters with such an in-depth knowledge on an incredibly wide variety of topics, that they limit themselves to a forum that tends to discuss cheese and Jay Tabb on a daily basis.
I can’t help but feel the wider society as a whole is missing out. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| According to…. on 11:36 - Sep 24 with 1266 views | Blueschev |
| According to…. on 11:34 - Sep 24 by SE1blue |
For me, and I say this with the greatest of respect to TWTD, it makes me sad that there are so many highly-educated and well-informed posters with such an in-depth knowledge on an incredibly wide variety of topics, that they limit themselves to a forum that tends to discuss cheese and Jay Tabb on a daily basis.
I can’t help but feel the wider society as a whole is missing out. |
I agree, Jay Tabb should be part of a broader, national discussion. |  | | |
| Exactly this…. on 11:42 - Sep 24 with 1223 views | lowhouseblue |
| Exactly this…. on 10:32 - Sep 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
The immigration debate has become farcical- two sets of extremes, with little room for nuance.
It’s not far right to be worried about undocumented people entering the country (Iran has even been implicated sending agents by this route). It IS far right to want the Navy to sink ships.
In terms of legal migration, I don’t think it’s extreme to have concerns about the numbers of people getting visa’s given youth unemployment, rising use of AI, stagnant wages. It IS extreme to want no migration/remigration.
Bizarrely large scale immigration is one of the few issues whereby the harder left take the ‘big corporate view’ of more migration/uncapped migration, which of course lowers the pressure on wages and means businesses don’t need to train youngsters. It’s supposed to be a tool for critical skills gaps like the NHS (though arguably we should be funding the training for ourselves). |
exactly this. immigration policy is a completely legitimate subject for debate and a whole range of views can legitimately be held. the total numbers, the mix, the criteria to be applied, what is expected in terms of integration etc etc. it's also legitimate to discuss how policies pursued from blair onwards, culminating in boris, have acted to undermine a long-term consensus in seeing immigration as overwhelmingly positive. similarly, trying to de-legitimise opposing views and throwing labels around to silence such views is also part of the that process whereby consensus has been eroded. as you say, any debate on here is typically just name calling and pile ons. |  |
| 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 |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 11:46 - Sep 24 with 1209 views | DJR |
| Exactly this…. on 10:41 - Sep 24 by Benters |
So these ‘usual suspects’ is there two sets of ‘Usual Suspect’ or one?
Shirley there has to be two,how about those that float between the two,so there must be three sets? |
I think they are known as the unusual suspects. |  | | |
| Exactly this…. on 11:58 - Sep 24 with 1167 views | Dubtractor |
| Exactly this…. on 10:32 - Sep 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
The immigration debate has become farcical- two sets of extremes, with little room for nuance.
It’s not far right to be worried about undocumented people entering the country (Iran has even been implicated sending agents by this route). It IS far right to want the Navy to sink ships.
In terms of legal migration, I don’t think it’s extreme to have concerns about the numbers of people getting visa’s given youth unemployment, rising use of AI, stagnant wages. It IS extreme to want no migration/remigration.
Bizarrely large scale immigration is one of the few issues whereby the harder left take the ‘big corporate view’ of more migration/uncapped migration, which of course lowers the pressure on wages and means businesses don’t need to train youngsters. It’s supposed to be a tool for critical skills gaps like the NHS (though arguably we should be funding the training for ourselves). |
This is pretty much my position.
But, and this is a really fooking big but, none of that means we should have sympathy with the likes of Tommy two names and his tribute act, or their supporters at protests. It's those people, and discussions of their actions, that seems to get people really wound up. [Post edited 24 Sep 12:01]
|  |
| |
| According to…. on 12:02 - Sep 24 with 1151 views | Dubtractor |
| According to…. on 11:31 - Sep 24 by TheMoralMajority |
If you can't identify the usual suspects, then you ARE a usual suspect. |
I actively aim not to be a usual suspect.
Just a gobsh1te who occasionally chips in. | |
| |
| According to…. on 12:12 - Sep 24 with 1108 views | NthQldITFC |
| According to…. on 11:31 - Sep 24 by TheMoralMajority |
If you can't identify the usual suspects, then you ARE a usual suspect. |
The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled is convincing the world he didn't exist? |  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 12:13 - Sep 24 with 1098 views | DJR |
| Exactly this…. on 10:32 - Sep 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
The immigration debate has become farcical- two sets of extremes, with little room for nuance.
It’s not far right to be worried about undocumented people entering the country (Iran has even been implicated sending agents by this route). It IS far right to want the Navy to sink ships.
In terms of legal migration, I don’t think it’s extreme to have concerns about the numbers of people getting visa’s given youth unemployment, rising use of AI, stagnant wages. It IS extreme to want no migration/remigration.
Bizarrely large scale immigration is one of the few issues whereby the harder left take the ‘big corporate view’ of more migration/uncapped migration, which of course lowers the pressure on wages and means businesses don’t need to train youngsters. It’s supposed to be a tool for critical skills gaps like the NHS (though arguably we should be funding the training for ourselves). |
Not sure if the Blair government was hard left, but David Blunkett let it slip in a programme about 15 years after the event, that the earlier date than other EU countries for the free movement to the UK of east Europeans was the competitive advantage that the UK would gain by driving down wages.
And the "Boris wave" was the reciprocal response from the Tories to the abolition of free movement. [Post edited 24 Sep 12:15]
| | | |
| Exactly this…. on 12:37 - Sep 24 with 1011 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Exactly this…. on 12:13 - Sep 24 by DJR |
Not sure if the Blair government was hard left, but David Blunkett let it slip in a programme about 15 years after the event, that the earlier date than other EU countries for the free movement to the UK of east Europeans was the competitive advantage that the UK would gain by driving down wages.
And the "Boris wave" was the reciprocal response from the Tories to the abolition of free movement. [Post edited 24 Sep 12:15]
|
Absolutely Blair wasn’t, I guess I was thinking more the Corbynista type liberal left being on the same side as big business. Their motivations are probably different of course, it’s the juxtaposition that they are inadvertently backing the pro-business fluid labour market position. For Blair I suspect it was because he drew so much support from the middle class, ultimately it’s the working classes who are most impacted by an increased flow of labour since they are less likely to have scarse skills/qualifications.
I made that distinction versus the Tories because it’s fairly obvious the Tories are on the side of big business. The fact that (despite the hostile rhetoric) the Tories handed out more work visas than anyone, should make even the most staunch left supporter of large scale migration question the intentions/impact on the labour market.
Apologies, didn’t want this to be a debate around immigration- it was more the point around the fact debates on immigration (and many issues) are reduced to ‘sides’, and dumbed down debates, whereas the reality is much more nuanced. I appreciate there are some that join in just for one line attacks though which then escalate. I leave it there on the immigration think it was just intended as an example of where we are now. |  | | |
| Really... on 12:40 - Sep 24 with 1001 views | itfc_bucks |
Well, that's been an interesting 18 hours or so. I must say, I'm just a little bit surprised. Firstly that it's finally happened and secondly it has taken quite so long for for repeat offenders to be sent on their way.
While I have absolutely no doubt of the depth of his passion to support the club, Sitters has quite the record for pulling the pin on the grenade and walking away. Do I think he's an actual turquoise wearing ,die hard reform voter? Possibly not. Is he indicative of the general malaise in this country, the "doing things for clicks" culture and the broad acceptance of dehumanization of others? Yes he absolutely is. And he's not alone on this board.
I've been part of this community, both as an active and lurking poster since the rivals days. I've seen more than our fair share of disagreements and fallings out, but the general state of the ability of posters to disagree agreeably has absolutely fallen through the floor in recent years, and forms part of the reason why I rarely engage here anymore.
I thoroughly enjoyed debating with people of contrary opinions on here, who have the capacity to engage meaningfully and, without mentioning names in particular, I thank those people for their engagement.
The ability to see things from the other side is a fundamental part of both the human condition and how politics should work. TWTD as a microcosm, shows us quite how broken modern politics in this country really is.
It shouldn't take Phil getting out his banhammer, but if it does, I'm all in favour of it. | |
| |
| Really... on 12:49 - Sep 24 with 965 views | BlueandTruesince82 |
| Really... on 12:40 - Sep 24 by itfc_bucks |
Well, that's been an interesting 18 hours or so. I must say, I'm just a little bit surprised. Firstly that it's finally happened and secondly it has taken quite so long for for repeat offenders to be sent on their way.
While I have absolutely no doubt of the depth of his passion to support the club, Sitters has quite the record for pulling the pin on the grenade and walking away. Do I think he's an actual turquoise wearing ,die hard reform voter? Possibly not. Is he indicative of the general malaise in this country, the "doing things for clicks" culture and the broad acceptance of dehumanization of others? Yes he absolutely is. And he's not alone on this board.
I've been part of this community, both as an active and lurking poster since the rivals days. I've seen more than our fair share of disagreements and fallings out, but the general state of the ability of posters to disagree agreeably has absolutely fallen through the floor in recent years, and forms part of the reason why I rarely engage here anymore.
I thoroughly enjoyed debating with people of contrary opinions on here, who have the capacity to engage meaningfully and, without mentioning names in particular, I thank those people for their engagement.
The ability to see things from the other side is a fundamental part of both the human condition and how politics should work. TWTD as a microcosm, shows us quite how broken modern politics in this country really is.
It shouldn't take Phil getting out his banhammer, but if it does, I'm all in favour of it. |
Its woth all of us remembering that tone is often lost in the written word and once (especially if being disagreed with) can easily infer a dig whene there may none, 2 posters having a debate maye increasingly infer tone with each other that may not have initially been there but then becomes manifested as a result.
Were all different, we should still respect each other because 2 things we (mostly, the odd budgie stirrer aside) all agree on are 1. We love ITFC, that should bind us together and 2. We love this place. Christ, I talk to you lot on here more than I do most of my actual real life friends. |  |
| |
| Really... on 13:01 - Sep 24 with 921 views | itfc_bucks |
| Really... on 12:49 - Sep 24 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Its woth all of us remembering that tone is often lost in the written word and once (especially if being disagreed with) can easily infer a dig whene there may none, 2 posters having a debate maye increasingly infer tone with each other that may not have initially been there but then becomes manifested as a result.
Were all different, we should still respect each other because 2 things we (mostly, the odd budgie stirrer aside) all agree on are 1. We love ITFC, that should bind us together and 2. We love this place. Christ, I talk to you lot on here more than I do most of my actual real life friends. |
I recently had to have some very firm words with my own father, following a misunderstanding where he had inferred a certain motivation on the part of my wife and I, which wasn't accurate.
My wife and I have discussed this sort of thing and now have a little "life rule" which says unless there is actual evidence to the country, just assume that someone is operating with the best of intentions. We've shared this with my old man and, I think he's getting there with it.
Now I'm not saying everyone who uses this board is sweetness and light (far from it) but a little bit more of an assumption of positive intent might go a long way both here and in the real world.
That also being said, people who repeatedly show themselves to not be working with positive intent need to be treated as such. I think the tolerance for poor behaviour has been far too generous, again, both here and in the real world.
I have little sympathy for anyone who's managed to get themselves banned here recently, regardless of them having a small child or appearing frequently on TV crowd shots. | |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 13:46 - Sep 24 with 816 views | DJR |
| Exactly this…. on 12:37 - Sep 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
Absolutely Blair wasn’t, I guess I was thinking more the Corbynista type liberal left being on the same side as big business. Their motivations are probably different of course, it’s the juxtaposition that they are inadvertently backing the pro-business fluid labour market position. For Blair I suspect it was because he drew so much support from the middle class, ultimately it’s the working classes who are most impacted by an increased flow of labour since they are less likely to have scarse skills/qualifications.
I made that distinction versus the Tories because it’s fairly obvious the Tories are on the side of big business. The fact that (despite the hostile rhetoric) the Tories handed out more work visas than anyone, should make even the most staunch left supporter of large scale migration question the intentions/impact on the labour market.
Apologies, didn’t want this to be a debate around immigration- it was more the point around the fact debates on immigration (and many issues) are reduced to ‘sides’, and dumbed down debates, whereas the reality is much more nuanced. I appreciate there are some that join in just for one line attacks though which then escalate. I leave it there on the immigration think it was just intended as an example of where we are now. |
The arguments for staying in the EU always seemed to me a balance of competing aspects, and in my case the international dimension was probably the most important.
But Corbyn probably got it about right when (to intense criticism), he gave it a 7 out of 10.
And if Phil were ever to hold a seminar on appropriate behaviour on TWTD, I am sure our interactions would be a case study in best practice. [Post edited 24 Sep 13:58]
| | | |
| Really... on 13:51 - Sep 24 with 799 views | DJR |
| Really... on 12:49 - Sep 24 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Its woth all of us remembering that tone is often lost in the written word and once (especially if being disagreed with) can easily infer a dig whene there may none, 2 posters having a debate maye increasingly infer tone with each other that may not have initially been there but then becomes manifested as a result.
Were all different, we should still respect each other because 2 things we (mostly, the odd budgie stirrer aside) all agree on are 1. We love ITFC, that should bind us together and 2. We love this place. Christ, I talk to you lot on here more than I do most of my actual real life friends. |
It's why, whenever possible, I like to include a comment in my post which I think merits a smiley face.
This is something I learnt from leitrumblue.
And the point was brought home to me when a joke I made recently (without a smiley face because I didn't think it needed it) that Maeda's grey hair made be concerned he was prematurely ageing was downvoted. [Post edited 24 Sep 13:59]
| | | |
| Exactly this…. on 14:00 - Sep 24 with 742 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| Exactly this…. on 10:32 - Sep 24 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
The immigration debate has become farcical- two sets of extremes, with little room for nuance.
It’s not far right to be worried about undocumented people entering the country (Iran has even been implicated sending agents by this route). It IS far right to want the Navy to sink ships.
In terms of legal migration, I don’t think it’s extreme to have concerns about the numbers of people getting visa’s given youth unemployment, rising use of AI, stagnant wages. It IS extreme to want no migration/remigration.
Bizarrely large scale immigration is one of the few issues whereby the harder left take the ‘big corporate view’ of more migration/uncapped migration, which of course lowers the pressure on wages and means businesses don’t need to train youngsters. It’s supposed to be a tool for critical skills gaps like the NHS (though arguably we should be funding the training for ourselves). |
Couldn't disagree more with your final paragraph as that's exactly why many on the Left voted for Lexit. Not that that makes someone against those seeking asylum. |  |
| "They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches." | | Poll: | What you watching. |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 14:20 - Sep 24 with 686 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Exactly this…. on 14:00 - Sep 24 by BanksterDebtSlave |
Couldn't disagree more with your final paragraph as that's exactly why many on the Left voted for Lexit. Not that that makes someone against those seeking asylum. |
“ Not that that makes someone against those seeking asylum.”
The fact you felt compelled to say that (a statement I agree btw) in case anyone jumped on you is the kind of bad faith debating I was talking about. I would not have assumed that position made you against asylum, and in many ways isn’t relevant to what I was saying.
As Ed has shown, you can get in a lot of trouble for NOT saying things these days… | | | |
| Really... on 14:25 - Sep 24 with 673 views | leitrimblue |
| Really... on 12:49 - Sep 24 by BlueandTruesince82 |
Its woth all of us remembering that tone is often lost in the written word and once (especially if being disagreed with) can easily infer a dig whene there may none, 2 posters having a debate maye increasingly infer tone with each other that may not have initially been there but then becomes manifested as a result.
Were all different, we should still respect each other because 2 things we (mostly, the odd budgie stirrer aside) all agree on are 1. We love ITFC, that should bind us together and 2. We love this place. Christ, I talk to you lot on here more than I do most of my actual real life friends. |
I think tone and the fact you can't see facial expressions etc are a large part of the problem on social media. There's a big difference between someone making a comment while grinning compared to imagining someone scowling at the screen.
Imagine many of the disagreements on here wouldn't take place in real life, or would be quickly resolved with a smile and a laugh. Though you never know | | | |
| Exactly this…. on 14:33 - Sep 24 with 632 views | witchdoctor |
| Exactly this…. on 09:53 - Sep 24 by Luk38644 |
Inflammatory how? Because he aired a view you don't agree with? That's not inflammatory just because you don't agree with him. That's the problem with TWTD becoming an echochamber, everything that's opposing to your viewpoint becomes inflammatory. I'm equally not surprised he then abandons ship when the usual baying mob arrive.
Can I just remind people, there is no obligation to partake in a thread you've started, it's certainly not a bannable offence. I'm not even really sure why Sitters has been banned? |
he’s banned because ‘they’ demanded it..simples…😉 |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
