| Really... 21:41 - Sep 23 with 9280 views | PhilTWTD |
Getting tired of the sniping, trolling, winding up, dragging up threads from the past etc. Perhaps a bit more civility? |  | | |  |
| Really... on 09:32 - Sep 24 with 1197 views | lowhouseblue |
| Really... on 07:32 - Sep 24 by GlasgowBlue |
There is a big problem with TWTD at the moment. I’m on the opposite side of the argument with sitters when it comes to the death penalty or immigration, but he’s entitled to his view and should be allowed to express it. But every time he starts a thread posing a question, he is jumped on by a certain element who complain he is trolling or trying to start an argument.
I don’t see any difference between sitters thread and the one on Hampshire. Both discussing topical issues reported by the media.
A certain element trying to not only police what is posted, but what side of the argument each poster should be on. [Post edited 24 Sep 8:28]
|
it's been like this for ages. people try to police debate by casting any disagreement with them as extreme, radicalised, and part of some bigger unacceptable unspoken agenda. it's an old trick, but civil discussion is always going to struggle when disagreement is constantly framed in that way. |  |
| 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 agree in general… on 09:35 - Sep 24 with 1190 views | Bloots |
| Exactly this…. on 09:20 - Sep 24 by _CliveBaker_ |
I missed it, I always miss the drama.
FWIW Sitters is a good poster, a long standing member of the forum and its a shame he's been banned. He did strike me as someone who knew what he was doing a lot of the time though, some of his posts were deliberately provocative and he was happy to light the touchpaper and stand back. He was pretty intentional in a lot of that, despite his claims otherwise, which don't really wash.
Not saying any of that is enough for a ban though. Its quite embarrassing that people can't just discuss something without getting too personal or weird about it. Its not really fair on Phil to have to spend his evening policing a group of tw@ts. |
….but he’s hardly alone in starting a thread and not engaging with the replies. Although ironically he did engage with the thread in question.
It’s no different to that thread about “trouble in Hampshire” or numerous threads saying the same old things about Israel/Gaza/Palastine/Farage/Trump.
My point is that the “punishment” seems to rely entirely on who posts it and the content of the original post.
Anyway, this thread will get pulled anytime now! |  |
| Keaton, Kint, McManus, Fenster and Hockney. |
| |
| I agree in general… on 09:37 - Sep 24 with 1154 views | itfcjoe |
| I agree in general… on 09:35 - Sep 24 by Bloots |
….but he’s hardly alone in starting a thread and not engaging with the replies. Although ironically he did engage with the thread in question.
It’s no different to that thread about “trouble in Hampshire” or numerous threads saying the same old things about Israel/Gaza/Palastine/Farage/Trump.
My point is that the “punishment” seems to rely entirely on who posts it and the content of the original post.
Anyway, this thread will get pulled anytime now! |
Shame that it is only in football now where you get a yellow card if asking for someone to be booked......lots of that goes on on here constantly by the same posters who can't take any post at face value |  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 09:41 - Sep 24 with 1118 views | Luk38644 |
| Exactly this…. on 09:06 - Sep 24 by Bloots |
….if that thread had been started by someone else and read:
“Southport mental health patient accused of attacking guard, hope he gets rehabilitation treatment like he deserves” - It would have still created the same arguments, but would have led to those arguing getting binned rather than the OP.
The crazy thing about the whole incident was that the “usual suspects” (I can use that phrase because it’s already been used this morning, so assume it’s fine - we’ll see) jumped on him straight away claiming he doesn’t engage and then when he did they piled onto him anyway.
And then he got banned.
Bonkers. |
Yep - it's a real prolem on here and will undoubtedly force people to not bother posting on the site. Sitters is a top bloke, massive shame that anyone on here who holds a differing viewpoint gets jumped on and then looks like the bad person whether they choose to engage or whether they just choose to leave it.
I had bit of a debate on here yesterday, but when you're getting jumped on by 5/6/7 different posters, and one of them claiming I might be feeling self concious about feeling like a racist, I just logged off and left it. It massively stifles any kind of debate on here and has become an echochamber. |  | | |
| Really... on 09:41 - Sep 24 with 1115 views | DJR |
The phrase "pot calling the kettle black" springs to mind.  |  | | |
| There was even…. on 09:45 - Sep 24 with 1075 views | Bloots |
| Exactly this…. on 09:41 - Sep 24 by Luk38644 |
Yep - it's a real prolem on here and will undoubtedly force people to not bother posting on the site. Sitters is a top bloke, massive shame that anyone on here who holds a differing viewpoint gets jumped on and then looks like the bad person whether they choose to engage or whether they just choose to leave it.
I had bit of a debate on here yesterday, but when you're getting jumped on by 5/6/7 different posters, and one of them claiming I might be feeling self concious about feeling like a racist, I just logged off and left it. It massively stifles any kind of debate on here and has become an echochamber. |
….someone on here yesterday claiming that Sitters had been “radicalised”!
FFS he’s about as “radical” as a glass of water.
Absolute loons. | |
| Keaton, Kint, McManus, Fenster and Hockney. |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 09:45 - Sep 24 with 1064 views | Swailsey |
| Exactly this…. on 09:41 - Sep 24 by Luk38644 |
Yep - it's a real prolem on here and will undoubtedly force people to not bother posting on the site. Sitters is a top bloke, massive shame that anyone on here who holds a differing viewpoint gets jumped on and then looks like the bad person whether they choose to engage or whether they just choose to leave it.
I had bit of a debate on here yesterday, but when you're getting jumped on by 5/6/7 different posters, and one of them claiming I might be feeling self concious about feeling like a racist, I just logged off and left it. It massively stifles any kind of debate on here and has become an echochamber. |
But that's obviously not what he's doing is it? With the exception of the one post yesterday, he's always been inflammatory for the sake of it - I'm pretty sure he even subtly admitted it once. Very disingenuous to suggest he's the victim of not being able to put his point of view across.
People have personal responsibility, but it's incredibly frustrating and is clearly antagonistic to the board. I'm assuming Admins feel the same, hence he's been banned.
Rational debate occurs on here if people don't do it with arrogance. Balcom is a good example. I disagree with pretty much everything they say, but they are open, balanced and explain their side. [Post edited 24 Sep 9:46]
|  |
| Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA |
| |
| Really... on 09:49 - Sep 24 with 1031 views | vapour_trail |
sniping, trolling, winding up, dragging up threads from the past
Didn’t take long for this one to head down that route. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Exactly this…. on 09:53 - Sep 24 with 985 views | Luk38644 |
| Exactly this…. on 09:45 - Sep 24 by Swailsey |
But that's obviously not what he's doing is it? With the exception of the one post yesterday, he's always been inflammatory for the sake of it - I'm pretty sure he even subtly admitted it once. Very disingenuous to suggest he's the victim of not being able to put his point of view across.
People have personal responsibility, but it's incredibly frustrating and is clearly antagonistic to the board. I'm assuming Admins feel the same, hence he's been banned.
Rational debate occurs on here if people don't do it with arrogance. Balcom is a good example. I disagree with pretty much everything they say, but they are open, balanced and explain their side. [Post edited 24 Sep 9:46]
|
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? | | | |
| Exactly this…. on 09:55 - Sep 24 with 961 views | Swailsey |
| 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? |
It's extremely obvious. I've explained how and it was quite clear. I'm not going to engage with you further because I will get frustrated.
You posted some pretty close to the bone things yesterday, and upvoted several comments which were quite bigoted, so I have no wish to discuss things with you further.
If you aren't sure why he's been banned, and missed the comments in question I'm not sure you're in a position to comment.
Thanks for reminding me how to post on a forum though. | |
| Who said: "Colin Healy made Cesc Fabregas look like Colin Healy"? | We miss you TLA |
| |
| There was even…. on 09:59 - Sep 24 with 919 views | Luk38644 |
| There was even…. on 09:45 - Sep 24 by Bloots |
….someone on here yesterday claiming that Sitters had been “radicalised”!
FFS he’s about as “radical” as a glass of water.
Absolute loons. |
I hadn't seen that but blimey, Sitters isn't 'radicalised', he's just a normal bloke & concerned father who is seeing things he doesn't like at the moment, and he's allowed to hold that viewpoint in the same way that I do and so do MANY others over the country right now.
I think you're considered radicalised on here by some if you dare to have a viewpoint which is on the right of John Lennon. | | | |
| There was even…. on 09:59 - Sep 24 with 921 views | Ryorry |
| There was even…. on 09:45 - Sep 24 by Bloots |
….someone on here yesterday claiming that Sitters had been “radicalised”!
FFS he’s about as “radical” as a glass of water.
Absolute loons. |
It’s been the case for a long time that some people have got away with the really serious abuse of throwing mental health terms at individuals, not in jest, but as a form of personal belittling, undermining etc.
Admins don’t have the time or resources to read every thread, so encourage posters to let them know - but if anyone does, they often then have accusations of “running to Phil” sneeringly chucked at them, often by the perpetrator. [Post edited 24 Sep 10:03]
|  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 10:02 - Sep 24 with 901 views | leitrimblue |
| Exactly this…. on 09:41 - Sep 24 by Luk38644 |
Yep - it's a real prolem on here and will undoubtedly force people to not bother posting on the site. Sitters is a top bloke, massive shame that anyone on here who holds a differing viewpoint gets jumped on and then looks like the bad person whether they choose to engage or whether they just choose to leave it.
I had bit of a debate on here yesterday, but when you're getting jumped on by 5/6/7 different posters, and one of them claiming I might be feeling self concious about feeling like a racist, I just logged off and left it. It massively stifles any kind of debate on here and has become an echochamber. |
Erm, you made some points, people disagreed with um.
You then attempted to play the ' people are just labeled as racist card' in a reply to a post by myself in which i hadn't mentioned or in anyway suggested people who have an issue with immigration were racist.
I then asked if perhaps you were feeling a tad paranoid.
Just to had some context to yer whining |  | | |
| Exactly this…. on 10:03 - Sep 24 with 887 views | Luk38644 |
| Exactly this…. on 09:55 - Sep 24 by Swailsey |
It's extremely obvious. I've explained how and it was quite clear. I'm not going to engage with you further because I will get frustrated.
You posted some pretty close to the bone things yesterday, and upvoted several comments which were quite bigoted, so I have no wish to discuss things with you further.
If you aren't sure why he's been banned, and missed the comments in question I'm not sure you're in a position to comment.
Thanks for reminding me how to post on a forum though. |
Refusing to engage with the thread after posting - isn't that what Sitters got banned for?
I don't consider what I posted yesterday was 'close to the bone', I'd suggest that it might be for TWTD these days, but I can assure you that alot of people are asking the same questions right now and that shouldn't be shut down as 'bigoted'.
I saw posters mocking 'genuine concerns' yesterday, that completely devalues the views on people who are concerned about that they're seeing and says to them that they don't matter, or their concerns are invalid because they're wrong. | | | |
| Exactly this…. on 10:07 - Sep 24 with 864 views | Luk38644 |
| Exactly this…. on 10:02 - Sep 24 by leitrimblue |
Erm, you made some points, people disagreed with um.
You then attempted to play the ' people are just labeled as racist card' in a reply to a post by myself in which i hadn't mentioned or in anyway suggested people who have an issue with immigration were racist.
I then asked if perhaps you were feeling a tad paranoid.
Just to had some context to yer whining |
' people are just labeled as racist card' - it's not a card, it's a genuine problem on this website and it wasn't aimed at your reply, it was a general view as soon as the immigration debate comes up. It stifles debate around immigration, has done for years and no doubt will continue to do so.
Thanks for the context though. | | | |
| Exactly this…. on 10:12 - Sep 24 with 824 views | leitrimblue |
| Exactly this…. on 10:07 - Sep 24 by Luk38644 |
' people are just labeled as racist card' - it's not a card, it's a genuine problem on this website and it wasn't aimed at your reply, it was a general view as soon as the immigration debate comes up. It stifles debate around immigration, has done for years and no doubt will continue to do so.
Thanks for the context though. |
The pleasures all mine  | | | |
| Exactly this…. on 10:32 - Sep 24 with 739 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| Exactly this…. on 10:07 - Sep 24 by Luk38644 |
' people are just labeled as racist card' - it's not a card, it's a genuine problem on this website and it wasn't aimed at your reply, it was a general view as soon as the immigration debate comes up. It stifles debate around immigration, has done for years and no doubt will continue to do so.
Thanks for the context though. |
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). |  | | |
| Really... on 10:37 - Sep 24 with 692 views | Benters |
| Really... on 07:32 - Sep 24 by GlasgowBlue |
There is a big problem with TWTD at the moment. I’m on the opposite side of the argument with sitters when it comes to the death penalty or immigration, but he’s entitled to his view and should be allowed to express it. But every time he starts a thread posing a question, he is jumped on by a certain element who complain he is trolling or trying to start an argument.
I don’t see any difference between sitters thread and the one on Hampshire. Both discussing topical issues reported by the media.
A certain element trying to not only police what is posted, but what side of the argument each poster should be on. [Post edited 24 Sep 8:28]
|
This spot on. |  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 10:41 - Sep 24 with 688 views | Luk38644 |
| 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). |
Agree with all of that.
A proper grown up debate needs to be had about immigration without both sides just chucking names about. | | | |
| Exactly this…. on 10:41 - Sep 24 with 678 views | Benters |
| Exactly this…. on 09:06 - Sep 24 by Bloots |
….if that thread had been started by someone else and read:
“Southport mental health patient accused of attacking guard, hope he gets rehabilitation treatment like he deserves” - It would have still created the same arguments, but would have led to those arguing getting binned rather than the OP.
The crazy thing about the whole incident was that the “usual suspects” (I can use that phrase because it’s already been used this morning, so assume it’s fine - we’ll see) jumped on him straight away claiming he doesn’t engage and then when he did they piled onto him anyway.
And then he got banned.
Bonkers. |
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? | |
| |
| Really... on 10:47 - Sep 24 with 691 views | PhilTWTD |
| Really... on 07:32 - Sep 24 by GlasgowBlue |
There is a big problem with TWTD at the moment. I’m on the opposite side of the argument with sitters when it comes to the death penalty or immigration, but he’s entitled to his view and should be allowed to express it. But every time he starts a thread posing a question, he is jumped on by a certain element who complain he is trolling or trying to start an argument.
I don’t see any difference between sitters thread and the one on Hampshire. Both discussing topical issues reported by the media.
A certain element trying to not only police what is posted, but what side of the argument each poster should be on. [Post edited 24 Sep 8:28]
|
If that - posting a controversial topic just to cause a row - had been why he was banned that might have been an argument. Really has been a culmination of things and really the dehumanising of asylum seekers and taking a pop at another user for the Nth time last night really was the last straw. | | | |
| Really... on 10:49 - Sep 24 with 614 views | giant_stow |
| Really... on 10:47 - Sep 24 by PhilTWTD |
If that - posting a controversial topic just to cause a row - had been why he was banned that might have been an argument. Really has been a culmination of things and really the dehumanising of asylum seekers and taking a pop at another user for the Nth time last night really was the last straw. |
has anyone nominated you for a MBE for adult care services in the community yet? |  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 10:53 - Sep 24 with 586 views | leitrimblue |
| 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? |
At least 2, though i like the idea of a 3rd undercover commando set that can move from gang to gang without detection | | | |
| Really... on 10:53 - Sep 24 with 585 views | C_HealyIsAPleasure |
| Really... on 08:41 - Sep 24 by Swailsey |
For sure - which is why I made sure I pointed that out. |
Sorry you did - either that was added via edit or I’m blind and skimmed over that sentence! |  |
| |
| Exactly this…. on 10:56 - Sep 24 with 546 views | Benters |
| Exactly this…. on 10:53 - Sep 24 by leitrimblue |
At least 2, though i like the idea of a 3rd undercover commando set that can move from gang to gang without detection |
The third set is those that are nice to you one minute then sneak a downie on you when your not looking.. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
