Nutter Infestation

[Phil D. Rolls]

Does anyone else think this board has become infested with nutters lately? We've had a couple of members who seem like BNP recruiters (Stanton Sharkey, Plumber), not to mention all sorts of strange posts.

Please be clear, I am not calling someone with a different view to mine a nutter. I am thinking about those who make statements with absolutely no logic to them at all.

It seems to me the seagulls are following the trawler once more.

[Future17]

I've noticed this as well and mentioned it to a friend recently. I'm hoping it's just close-season-itis.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I've noticed this as well and mentioned it to a friend recently. I'm hoping it's just close-season-itis.

Things are getting pretty unpleasant around here. :agree:

[J-C]

I've noticed this too in the past couple of weeks, I put it down to being bored with sod all else to talk about, so lets just wind folk up with crap.

[Jay]

I agree but too many people are biting, me included in the beginning but I have learned to stay away.

Like I say to the kids when people are trying to wind them up- dont react as its more fun for them, say nothing and walk away and they will feel stupid. :greengrin

[J-C]

Came in late last night after working till about 1.30am and read what I could to catch up, jeez! I missed a beauty of a thread about gay marches. Just read it and boy is there some real scary, ignorant people coming on here. I know it takes all sorts to fill this big wide world and that's what makes it so beautiful but some of the posters recently make Wacko Jacko look normal.:greengrin

[J-C]

I agree but too many people are biting, me included in the beginning but I have learned to stay away.

Like I say to the kids when people are trying to wind them up- dont react as its more fun for them, say nothing and walk away and they will feel stupid. :greengrin


Oh! by the way, give us a wee chance in the arcade section, yer hammering us all the time. :greengrin

[Betty Boop]

Does anyone else think this board has become infested with nutters lately? We've had a couple of members who seem like BNP recruiters (Stanton Sharkey, Plumber), not to mention all sorts of strange posts.

Please be clear, I am not calling someone with a different view to mine a nutter. I am thinking about those who make statements with absolutely no logic to them at all.

It seems to me the seagulls are following the trawler once more.

Has he not been on here before? He certainly had a familiar posting style. :rolleyes:

[hibsbollah]

Has he not been on here before? He certainly had a familiar posting style. :rolleyes:

Yes he has. Plumber thinks that Boozy was a 'French p**f', Mixus mistakes were all down to Collins, and Chisholm was the 'best midfielder at the club'.

It all depends on how you define 'nutter' though. There are some people on here who cant accept any difference of opinion without resorting to sarcasm and abuse. On the other hand, there are some good guys with 'outlandish' views on things that I liked a lot, but got banned for seemingly not having a consensus view (Green Brazil springs to mind). Just my opinion.

[Jay]

Oh! by the way, give us a wee chance in the arcade section, yer hammering us all the time. :greengrin

Awaaaaay! I'm taking it easy to give you a chance :greengrin

[Wembley67]

Awaaaaay! I'm taking it easy to give you a chance :greengrin

That's only because I never go in anymore....I may have to now though :greengrin

[Hibby D]

Has he not been on here before? He certainly had a familiar posting style. :rolleyes:

:wink:

I'm going to listen in to Hibernimum's words of wisdom made earlier on in this thread and try hard not to get sucked into any more spiders' webs from now on - easier said than done when you're an admin though :dizzy: Decisions we make as a group and then implement as an individual are often presumed to also be personal opinions (and vice versa I suppose) when in reality they're made for the good of the site.

Do I think this place is being infiltrated by nutters? Absolutely not :no way: You'd be impressed and suprprised at the work that goes on behind the scenes by some of the guys to ensure that doesn't happen (although I admit that on occasion one or two have slipped in under our radar).

Close season does play a big part in things but so does a forum like this. Whether we're discussing politics or gay pride or capital punishment, people have more time to become involved because there's little by way of footie to be discussed on the mb. Passions rise and debates become intensely technical as everyone strives to put their own point of view across.

I love this forum - it's often an education for me and I enjoy reading threads on subject matters I'm not too clued up on or sometimes even aware of.

There are a hell of lot of very knowledgable contributors to this site :agree: and others who's contribution is more entertainment than factual but I feed on the diversity of it all. I'd hate to see that being torn apart by individuals whose sole intention is to get off on the reactions of others by being deliberately controversial.

:hnet:

[Hibby D]

There are some people on here who cant accept any difference of opinion without resorting to sarcasm and abuse. On the other hand, there are some good guys with 'outlandish' views on things that I liked a lot, but got banned for seemingly not having a consensus view (Green Brazil springs to mind). Just my opinion.

Absolutely not :no way: It's not about whether or not somone's opinion is in the minority - it's about how they put that pov forward. If someone can do that without resorting to abuse then their opinion will always be allowed to stand :agree:

I'm going to bow out now and leave you guys to get on with it - remember the rules though :devil:

[Jay]

That's only because I never go in anymore....I may have to now though :greengrin

I'm missing you wembs there are new pretenders to the throne! :greengrin

[Jay]

Absolutely not :no way: It's not about whether or not somone's opinion is in the minority - it's about how they put that pov forward. If someone can do that without resorting to abuse then their opinion will always be allowed to stand :agree:

I'm going to bow out now and leave you guys to get on with it - remember the rules though :devil:

Got to agree with D peeps. Look at the recent threads by Falkirkhibee, his views were pretty much in the minority but he put them forward articulately (sp :greengrin) and without abuse. He still posts .

[sleeping giant]

There are far too many posters who feel the need to have a go at someone's post on a thread rather than have an input on the thread itself.
Some of these posters have the cheek to call others attention seekers:hnet:

A couple of longterm posters have been confirmed as being fannies this week:agree:

edit: just to confirm i am not talking about 65BD.

[Lucius Apuleius]

I think it is all probably a mixture of all the above. I am not the most articulate of people and sometimes don't put over my point of view in the best manner, maybe something to with the fact I speak pigin half the day anyway:greengrin , however I probably have pretty outlandish views on a lot of things. Views that I am absolutely positive would result in a hell of a lot of abuse should I post them. Does that make my views wrong? I don't think so, obviously. I feel it is better not to express them rather than let a thread descend into a torrent of abuse. What I cannot understand is how a lot of very intelligent posters suddenly become rabid dogs when a view is totally against what they believe. Life is all about opinions and if we did not have differences of opinions what would be the point of life never mind message boards? Live and let live. People have their views, they are entitled to it. You have your views, you are entitled to them. Will abusing someone because he thinks differently from you make him/her change their mind? No, so why bother abusing them?

I love you all anyway.

[down-the-slope]

No there is not enough 'nutters' on here....which I suspect is really just people with different opinions...which if expressed in a reasonable manner is a good thing


EDIT - now just read other posts and glad that some agree..personally I preffer group 'moderation' rather than a narrower filter provided by 'admin'...but thats just my view :)

Generally if you ignore the ridiculous it goes else where in search of a catch....don't 'feed the beast' if you don't like it. (I know there is a limit where punting is the only option however) but feel that 'banter' often gets put down on here claiming its abuse

[da-robster]

No there is not enough 'nutters' on here....which I suspect is really just people with different opinions...which if expressed in a reasonable manner is a good thing

I agree that diversity of opinion is a good thing but the problem the accused nutters haven't been expressing these things in a good way. what we must remember is hibs net is a public forum so we can not allow people to be racist or homophobic for example. I'm all for freedom of speach but over the last few days there has been an infestation of these types of people and I don't think we can ignore that.

[Hibrandenburg]

Can't post/read as much as I'd like to at present but some of the posts on here at the moment remind me why I left Scotland all those years ago. Quite sad in the year 2009 :rolleyes:

[(((Fergus)))]

I agree that diversity of opinion is a good thing but the problem the accused nutters haven't been expressing these things in a good way. what we must remember is hibs net is a public forum so we can not allow people to be racist or homophobic for example. I'm all for freedom of speach but over the last few days there has been an infestation of these types of people and I don't think we can ignore that.

How are people who are racist or homophobic going to learn the error of their ways if they are just abused or punted off? If people on here really do know better they should be afforded the opportunity of setting these people right.

Re. Green Brazil, he was punted for questioning the majority opinion - repeatedly. People called him a yam and that was it. (Funny how you can say what you like a yam but not any other "minority group"...)

All in my humble opinion, of course.

[da-robster]

How are people who are racist or homophobic going to learn the error of their ways if they are just abused or punted off? If people on here really do know better they should be afforded the opportunity of setting these people right.

Re. Green Brazil, he was punted for questioning the majority opinion - repeatedly. People called him a yam and that was it. (Funny how you can say what you like a yam but not any other "minority group"...)

All in my humble opinion, of course.

I don't know anything about green brazil's case so can't respond about that.

In regard to your first point they are being abusive to a group of which is not acceptable. IMHO if people are being just as abusive back to them they should be given the same punishement as the poster in question.

[Jay]

There is a huge difference between saying "I disagree with the lifestyle of homosexuals and I dont think they should be allowed kids" and "poofs are a bunch of pervs and peados"

One is stating an opinion in a debateable way, coherently and unabusively (count the big words in me today :greengrin) the other is just an abusive statement baiting an argument.

Hibs.net or any other decent forum cannot allow posts like the second one to stand surely? It certainly wouldn't be the forum I would like to log into on a regular basis. I think people who state their opinions unabusively should have the right to post them and receive feedback without abuse. The admins appear to me to allow that to happen as much as possible but usually end up having to edit so many posts it doesn't make sense anymore.

[Saorsa]

There are far too many posters who feel the need to have a go at someone's post on a thread rather than have an input on the thread itself.
Some of these posters have the cheek to call others attention seekers:hnet:

A couple of longterm posters have been confirmed as being fannies this week:agree:ah well, at least you've come clean now :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

Just to reiterate what I said at the top of the thread, I've no problem with someone whose opinion is different from mine, and who can make an attempt at persuading me to change. I'm on about the ones that spit the dummy when the argument is going against them, or resort to personal insults - that is out of order IMO.

Even worse are the wind up merchants who think they are being funny by being controversial on a subject, or who disappear when the other side scores a point off them. Then there are the ones that have nothing to say themselves, but go around issuing a sly kick when someone else has brought a poster down.

Trawlers-Sardines-Seagulls.

[The_Todd]

It's sad to see such homophobia and xenophobic views, but in all Hibs.net still has a fairly liberal user base I'd say. Any sneak peeks at JKB or FollowFollow would probably show that.

I don't know if Hibs have a JKB equivalent (.net is the JKB equivalent in terms of size and popularity, but do we have one in terms of behaviour?) or is there really an inherant
nasty streak of Der Hun Lite?

[Peevemor]

I think it is all probably a mixture of all the above. I am not the most articulate of people and sometimes don't put over my point of view in the best manner, maybe something to with the fact I speak pigin half the day anyway:greengrin , however I probably have pretty outlandish views on a lot of things. Views that I am absolutely positive would result in a hell of a lot of abuse should I post them. Does that make my views wrong? I don't think so, obviously. I feel it is better not to express them rather than let a thread descend into a torrent of abuse. What I cannot understand is how a lot of very intelligent posters suddenly become rabid dogs when a view is totally against what they believe. Life is all about opinions and if we did not have differences of opinions what would be the point of life never mind message boards? Live and let live. People have their views, they are entitled to it. You have your views, you are entitled to them. Will abusing someone because he thinks differently from you make him/her change their mind? No, so why bother abusing them?

I love you all anyway.

That's a bit poofy is it not? :greengrin

[sleeping giant]

ah well, at least you've come clean now :greengrin


I'll happily admit that i can be a fanny:agree:

I'm also a W****r:greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'll happily admit that i can be a fanny:agree:


So am I, I must be, because everytime I look in the mirror I get a (blank or blankety blank).

[sleeping giant]

So am I, I must be, because everytime I look in the mirror I get a (blank or blankety blank).

A hair in your teeth ?:cool2:

[Killiehibbie]

I'm also a W****r:greengrin

It's proven fact that 99% of us are.

[Hibbyradge]

It's proven fact that 99% of us are.

Yep. And the other 1% are liars.

[Killiehibbie]

Yep. And the other 1% are liars.

The old ones are the best.

[Lucius Apuleius]

That's a bit poofy is it not? :greengrin

:greengrin See, I wouldn't say that or it would attract abuse.:greengrin

[Woody1985]

I would say it's probably because people are sick of pussy footing around controversial issues for fear or repraisal. It may be that there's been a lot more controversial discussions on here lately.

Sometimes people don't articulate their points in the correct way but that doesn't necessarily mean they're nutters.

For example, 65bd on the gay march thread. He thinks that homosexuals are wrong as only a man and woman is natural. Yet appears to have lost a friend (don't know if it's a good friend) for his views. He's then been branded homophobic although openly admits that he has gay friends and work colleagues that he takes no issue with because of their sexuality but simply thinks it's wrong and perverted. Maybe it's not the 'nutters' who are the nutters.

[Jay]

I would say it's probably because people are sick of pussy footing around controversial issues for fear or repraisal. It may be that there's been a lot more controversial discussions on here lately.

Sometimes people don't articulate their points in the correct way but that doesn't necessarily mean they're nutters.

For example, 65bd on the gay march thread. He thinks that homosexuals are wrong as only a man and woman is natural. Yet appears to have lost a friend (don't know if it's a good friend) for his views. He's then been branded homophobic although openly admits that he has gay friends and work colleagues that he takes no issue with because of their sexuality but simply thinks it's wrong and perverted. Maybe it's not the 'nutters' who are the nutters.

I think the problem was the word perv. I cant see many people having gay friends if they openly call them pervs. openly saying they disagree with the lifestyle would make friendship difficult enough but calling them pervs in my opinion would make it impossible.

Its the manner in which opinions are stated that is the problem a lot of the time.

[(((Fergus)))]

I think the problem was the word perv. I cant see many people having gay friends if they openly call them pervs. openly saying they disagree with the lifestyle would make friendship difficult enough but calling them pervs in my opinion would make it impossible.

Its the manner in which opinions are stated that is the problem a lot of the time.


Would "perverted" have been acceptable,i.e., was it simply the fact that "perv" implied contempt/mockery or something?

Also, do the same rules apply for all forms of perceived deviation, e.g., using "paedo" (or worse) for paedophile, "yam fud" for Jambo, etc.?

[Jay]

Would "perverted" have been acceptable,i.e., was it simply the fact that "perv" implied contempt/mockery or something?

Also, do the same rules apply for all forms of perceived deviation, e.g., using "paedo" (or worse) for paedophile, "yam fud" for Jambo, etc.?

:confused: I'm not sure what you mean. Paedo for paedophile is nowhere near the same as using perv for homosexual in my opinion.


oops here I am not heeding my own advice eh :rolleyes:

[MSK]

How are people who are racist or homophobic going to learn the error of their ways if they are just abused or punted off? If people on here really do know better they should be afforded the opportunity of setting these people right.

Re. Green Brazil, he was punted for questioning the majority opinion - repeatedly. People called him a yam and that was it. (Funny how you can say what you like a yam but not any other "minority group"...)

All in my humble opinion, of course.Really ..?...i know why he was banned ..you though obviously dont, in fact you are nowhere near it..please dont attempt to mis-lead folk on here when you dont know the reasons yourself ..

[(((Fergus)))]

Really ..?...i know why he was banned ..you though obviously dont, in fact you are nowhere near it..please dont attempt to mis-lead folk on here when you dont know the reasons yourself ..

So why was he banned then?

[(((Fergus)))]

:confused: I'm not sure what you mean. Paedo for paedophile is nowhere near the same as using perv for homosexual in my opinion.


oops here I am not heeding my own advice eh :rolleyes:

Just wondering whether "perv" is wrong because the use of slang implies mockery or whether it is wrong in principal to say that homosexuality is perverted.

[sleeping giant]

I would say it's probably because people are sick of pussy footing around controversial issues for fear or repraisal. It may be that there's been a lot more controversial discussions on here lately.

Sometimes people don't articulate their points in the correct way but that doesn't necessarily mean they're nutters.

For example, 65bd on the gay march thread. He thinks that homosexuals are wrong as only a man and woman is natural. Yet appears to have lost a friend (don't know if it's a good friend) for his views. He's then been branded homophobic although openly admits that he has gay friends and work colleagues that he takes no issue with because of their sexuality but simply thinks it's wrong and perverted. Maybe it's not the 'nutters' who are the nutters.

:agree:
We are meant to accept people and their beliefs. Why does this not extend to people who dont agree with homosexuality ?

Admins are having a busy few days:greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

I would say it's probably because people are sick of pussy footing around controversial issues for fear or repraisal. It may be that there's been a lot more controversial discussions on here lately.

Sometimes people don't articulate their points in the correct way but that doesn't necessarily mean they're nutters.

For example, 65bd on the gay march thread. He thinks that homosexuals are wrong as only a man and woman is natural. Yet appears to have lost a friend (don't know if it's a good friend) for his views. He's then been branded homophobic although openly admits that he has gay friends and work colleagues that he takes no issue with because of their sexuality but simply thinks it's wrong and perverted. Maybe it's not the 'nutters' who are the nutters.

I well remember Charlie Manson the one time we met, he was philosophical about his lot.

"People think I'm a nutter", said the biggest cult in California, "but they just don't understand me".:greengrin

I'm afraid, as far as I'm concerned, if it looks like a dog, and barks like a dog, it usually is a dog.

[MSK]

So why was he banned then?I dont have to explain that to you ..

[Phil D. Rolls]

So why was he banned then?

I'm guessing, but I think the reason he didn't tell you why the bloke is barred is because he didn't want to.

[Killiehibbie]

I'm guessing, but I think the reason he didn't tell you why the bloke is barred is because he didn't want to.

If it's made public then everyone knows what is not acceptable. There are posts on here which have been removed that I didn't think were worth the bother.

[Hibby D]

If it's made public then everyone knows what is not acceptable. There are posts on here which have been removed that I didn't think were worth the bother.

It is public :agree:

http://www.hibs.net/message/misc.php?do=cfrules

[MSK]

If it's made public then everyone knows what is not acceptable. There are posts on here which have been removed that I didn't think were worth the bother.So when someone is banned we have to make it public ..?...this isnt a creche we are running here ..if folk cant abide by the rules then we follow procedure ..simple.

[Hibby D]

It is public :agree:

http://www.hibs.net/message/misc.php?do=cfrules

Sorry I should clarify - the rules are public.

[Phil D. Rolls]

So when someone is banned we have to make it public ..?...this isnt a creche we are running here ..if folk cant abide by the rules then we follow procedure ..simple.

Horsewhip them, it's the only language they understand. (Hope that's not too un PC).

[Jay]

Just wondering whether "perv" is wrong because the use of slang implies mockery or whether it is wrong in principal to say that homosexuality is perverted.

I think the phrase was that they are pervs not that homosexuality is perverted.

Usually calling someone a perv is abusive and implying that they are sexually twisted in some way. It often is preceded by the word 'dirty'

Thats all - time to listen to myself, not biting any more.

[MSK]

Horsewhip them, it's the only language they understand. (Hope that's not too un PC).I dont know the people mate but when they register they have to accept forum rules, if they want tae act like erses then they dont last long, i dont lose sleep over it ...

[Killiehibbie]

So when someone is banned we have to make it public ..?...this isnt a creche we are running here ..if folk cant abide by the rules then we follow procedure ..simple.


I've read posts that deserved to be deleted but weren't and others that were relatively mild that were deleted. Standards seem to vary depending on the subject. So if someone asked why a person got barred a short explanation without going into detail is not unreasonable.

[Onceinawhile]

No, different people have different opinions, it doesn't make them nutters. Having a flagrant disregard for human life is more "nutterish".

As an aside, on the gay pride march thread, those condemning the march would not have been argued with had their comments been about an orange march which has been shown time and time again. That thread stank of hypocrisy.

[Hibby D]

I've read posts that deserved to be deleted but weren't and others that were relatively mild that were deleted. Standards seem to vary depending on the subject. So if someone asked why a person got barred a short explanation without going into detail is not unreasonable.

And that is your opinion :agree: - we encourage people to report posts that they feel should be deleted. (By using the report post function). And you're right, it's not unreasonable to ask why someone was emptied - however a decision has been taken by the whole of the admin team not to divulge individual reasons. Frustrating on some occasions I agree (especially when it doesn't appear obvious) but it's better all round if that information isn't made available.


No, different people have different opinions, it doesn't make them nutters. Having a flagrant disregard for human life is more "nutterish".

As an aside, on the gay pride march thread, those condemning the march would not have been argued with had their comments been about an orange march which has been shown time and time again. That thread stank of hypocrisy.

Apples and Pears - the two can't be compared so I'd disagree here. The only way to truly know if that would have happened is if the same people were to contribute in a discussion on Orange marches.

[hibsbollah]

I dont have to explain that to you ..

I was reading the thread he got banned from when it happened. He was sticking up for Mixu at the time, which was fairly indefensible in itself, but banning him for it seemed to me to be a bit strange to say the least. When I had the temerity to ask about it in a thread afterwards the thread was then closed and then deleted:confused:

But it sounds like we're not allowed to discuss it, is that right?

[MSK]

I've read posts that deserved to be deleted but weren't and others that were relatively mild that were deleted. Standards seem to vary depending on the subject. So if someone asked why a person got barred a short explanation without going into detail is not unreasonable.If you have a problem with certain posts why dont you report them ?..i assume you have a full time job ...every Admin has a full time job so in respect we cant be here every minute of every hour everyday..we miss stuff..this is your site too ..if you are unhappy then let us know ..

With respect to your point about certain posts being deleted & others allowed we accept there will be flexibility, there may be content that i am unhappy about but another Admin may think the content is fine ...we cant always agree on everything im afraid but we do strive to maintain standards set...

[Mibbes Aye]

No, different people have different opinions, it doesn't make them nutters. Having a flagrant disregard for human life is more "nutterish".

As an aside, on the gay pride march thread, those condemning the march would not have been argued with had their comments been about an orange march which has been shown time and time again. That thread stank of hypocrisy.

Not sure if I'm picking you up wrong, apologies if I am and I'm sure you'll clarify.

Is a 'gay pride' march the same thing as one that seems to promote the supremacy of one particular religious sect?

I know defenders of Orange marches would disagree as to that being their purpose but being culturally-specific it is hard for me to see them as being anything but that. Admittedly, maybe if I considered myself a hard done-by and oppressed Orangeman I would consider myself something similar to Martin Luther King, dunno, but it's extremely hard to draw parallels between the experiences of discrimination faced by gay people and those faced by Protestant men in Scotland and Northern Ireland isn't it? :dunno:

As I say, I might not be picking up your post properly and apologies if I've misinterpreted it.

[MSK]

I was reading the thread he got banned from when it happened. He was sticking up for Mixu at the time, which was fairly indefensible in itself, but banning him for it seemed to me to be a bit strange to say the least. When I had the temerity to ask about it in a thread afterwards the thread was then closed and then deleted:confused:

But it sounds like we're not allowed to discuss it, is that right?He wasnt banned for that post in that thread ...i will not give you the reason as i feel it is none of your business ...discuss with others if you wish ..

[marinello59]

I've read posts that deserved to be deleted but weren't and others that were relatively mild that were deleted. Standards seem to vary depending on the subject. So if someone asked why a person got barred a short explanation without going into detail is not unreasonable.

User the report function then and it will be dealt with. We are not here 24/7, unfortunately families, paying work etc get in the way.

Usually when somebody is banned there is a lot of discussion between admins beforehand, we don't do it lightly and it is a last resort.
It's not as if we sit in an underground lair wearing dayglo jackets and thinking up new and novel ways of ruining peoples fun on here. Well, not all the time.:greengrin

[Hibby D]

I was reading the thread he got banned from when it happened. He was sticking up for Mixu at the time, which was fairly indefensible in itself, but banning him for it seemed to me to be a bit strange to say the least. When I had the temerity to ask about it in a thread afterwards the thread was then closed and then deleted:confused:

But it sounds like we're not allowed to discuss it, is that right?

I would agree - that would indeed be stupid and petty. So please accept it when I say that no-one is emptied or has ever been emptied for that, even if it appears that way.

Right that really is my final contribution to this thread (for now :greengrin)

[Mibbes Aye]

User the report function then and it will be dealt with. We are not here 24/7, unfortunately families, paying work etc get in the way.

Usually when somebody is banned there is a lot of discussion between admins beforehand, we don't do it lightly and it is a last resort.
It's not as if we sit in an underground lair wearing dayglo jackets and thinking up new and novel ways of ruining peoples fun on here. Well, not all the time.:greengrin

You've shattered a few dreams there I think. A good few of us aspired to that (especially the dayglo jackets) :boo hoo::greengrin

And another thing, if our subscription money isn't going on an underground lair, what the hell is it going on :grr: :greengrin

[hibsbollah]

I would agree - that would indeed be stupid and petty. So please accept it when I say that no-one is emptied or has ever been emptied for that, even if it appears that way.

Right that really is my final contribution to this thread (for now :greengrin)

Can't say fairer than that:agree:

[Darth Hibbie]

User the report function then and it will be dealt with. We are not here 24/7, unfortunately families, paying work etc get in the way.

Usually when somebody is banned there is a lot of discussion between admins beforehand, we don't do it lightly and it is a last resort.
It's not as if we sit in an underground lair wearing dayglo jackets and thinking up new and novel ways of ruining peoples fun on here. Well, not all the time.:greengrin

How dare you suggest that there is something more important than :hnet: in your life :grr:

As for your last point thats exactly how I imagine you all :greengrin

[Killiehibbie]

If you have a problem with certain posts why dont you report them ?..i assume you have a full time job ...every Admin has a full time job so in respect we cant be here every minute of every hour everyday..we miss stuff..this is your site too ..if you are unhappy then let us know ..

With respect to your point about certain posts being deleted & others allowed we accept there will be flexibility, there may be content that i am unhappy about but another Admin may think the content is fine ...we cant always agree on everything im afraid but we do strive to maintain standards set...

I would rather just ignore the posts I find offensive others might agree with what they say. I'm all for free speech.

[Onceinawhile]

Apples and Pears - the two can't be compared so I'd disagree here. The only way to truly know if that would have happened is if the same people were to contribute in a discussion on Orange marches.

I would be surprised if you didn't find those advocating gay pride marches, criticising orange marches on threads already passed, but I can't be bothered looking!


Not sure if I'm picking you up wrong, apologies if I am and I'm sure you'll clarify.

Is a 'gay pride' march the same thing as one that seems to promote the supremacy of one particular religious sect?

I know defenders of Orange marches would disagree as to that being their purpose but being culturally-specific it is hard for me to see them as being anything but that. Admittedly, maybe if I considered myself a hard done-by and oppressed Orangeman I would consider myself something similar to Martin Luther King, dunno, but it's extremely hard to draw parallels between the experiences of discrimination faced by gay people and those faced by Protestant men in Scotland and Northern Ireland isn't it? :dunno:

As I say, I might not be picking up your post properly and apologies if I've misinterpreted it.

Two things here:

1: I'm probably being incredibly niave, it happens a lot.

2: The way I'm looking at it is: some people were offended by others belief (i.e. some thought homosexuality was normal and these marches should be encouraged, some thought it wasn't and they should be discouraged). The point I'm trying to make is why is it ok to wish for rain on the orange march, where people are showing their beliefs, but not on a gay pride march where the same thing is happening?

[(((Fergus)))]

I was reading the thread he got banned from when it happened. He was sticking up for Mixu at the time, which was fairly indefensible in itself, but banning him for it seemed to me to be a bit strange to say the least. When I had the temerity to ask about it in a thread afterwards the thread was then closed and then deleted:confused:

But it sounds like we're not allowed to discuss it, is that right?


Yes, that's the thread I saw and mistakenly thought that it was because of that. I stand corrected.

[MSK]

I would rather just ignore the posts I find offensive others might agree with what they say. I'm all for free speech.Your choice..

[Ed De Gramo]

Nobody's a nutter.....it's just views that differ...and they end up getting rounded on because there view isn't allowed :agree:

It's just a shame that I was at a party last night and missed the chance to post on the 'gay marches' thread because I would be have one foot in both camps <<< no pun intended.

No offence intended towards the hard working Admins on here but they rounded on people like 65bd and Arabhibee because their views differered...

As for the MJ thread....the post was entitled "Michael Jackson Dead"....it wasn't an 'R.I.P' thread...so people's views on MJ were allowed...obviously jokes weren't (which I dinnae agree with, sometimes laughter is how people cope with loss).

As far as i'm concerned....if you become a celebrity and get embroiled with scandal and holding babies over balconies....then you should expect jokes to do the rounds, passing or not.....Sick jokes about tragedies happen all the time (some are sicker than others and whilst I don't like them, I can see how others will laugh).

It's amazing how the lack of football can show people in a different light.

[majorhibs]

I think the phrase was that they are pervs not that homosexuality is perverted.

Usually calling someone a perv is abusive and implying that they are sexually twisted in some way. It often is preceded by the word 'dirty'

Thats all - time to listen to myself, not biting any more.

Is that not just your interpretation as an individual though? My interpretation of what 65bd was saying was that the act, to a straight bloke, is perverted. My interpretation was that how 65bd called it was how I saw it. The thought of it to a straight bloke is it is perverted. Nae big deal in that, they probably think the same about straight blokes tastes, but I didnt think for a minute 65 was calling anybody "dirty", just using terms as he saw fit as an individual, fwiw being called "homophobic" nowadays is no big deal, the way I grew up in school I would reckon as a youngster if I WASNT thought of as "homophobic" then I wouldnt have been normal. :greengrin but then thats just words to me, same as 65bd's use of words which I thought were no big deal, and the stomping he got for simply putting across HIS viewpoint was way OTT imo. As for the infiltration of nutters thats an interpretation too. Could be viewed that the nutters were here all along. :wink:

[Hibby D]

No offence intended towards the hard working Admins on here but they rounded on people like 65bd and Arabhibee because their views differered...



No Gramo that is not what happened - many, many people condemned their views, not just admins.

[Mibbes Aye]

Is that not just your interpretation as an individual though? My interpretation of what 65bd was saying was that the act, to a straight bloke, is perverted. My interpretation was that how 65bd called it was how I saw it. The thought of it to a straight bloke is it is perverted.

Is it? Who are you speaking for? I'm a 'straight bloke' and I still fail to see what is perverted about it???

[da-robster]

I think that there is a big diiference between calling every gay person under the sun and stating your view that gay marches are not neccessary as gays have equal rights now.

However I have noticed how whenever an admin is attacked all admins attack them and then close the thread. I personally think the admins do a great job I'm just observing this sort of mob culture which I'm sure Riz could testify to that.

And finally Hibby D just because you're in a miniority of one does'nt make you mad.Just saying :greengrin.

[Killiehibbie]

Is it? Who are you speaking for? I'm a 'straight bloke' and I still fail to see what is perverted about it???

What you or me might consider perverted will be completely different to the woman sitting next you on the bus going to work considers perverse. It reminds of an old joke. What is a pervert? Someone who does it in the missionary position.

[Hibby D]

I think that there is a big diiference between calling every gay person under the sun and stating your view that gay marches are not neccessary as gays have equal rights now.

However I have noticed how whenever an admin is attacked all admins attack them and then close the thread. I personally think the admins do a great job I'm just observing this sort of mob culture which I'm sure Riz could testify to that.

And finally Hibby D just because you're in a miniority of one does'nt make you mad.Just saying :greengrin.

Can I explain why admins appear to "attack" in pairs or threes? :greengrin It's because we're online monitoring the threads and then we read something that we feel is unfair; usually a misrepresentation of something we've done. It's not mob-mentality, it's a desire to protect and preserve this site :agree:

I get upset when I read posts criticising our actions - we get it right most of the time but on occasion it appears we don't. No-one likes criticism and sometimes it's hard not to take it personally. But it has to be done or this place will implode - and that would be a tragedy :agree:

[MSK]

What you or me might consider perverted will be completely different to the woman sitting next you on the bus going to work considers perverse. It reminds of an old joke. What is a pervert? Someone who does it in the missionary position.I would call that lucky ..my wife thinks sex comes before seven ..:rolleyes:

[MSK]

I think that there is a big diiference between calling every gay person under the sun and stating your view that gay marches are not neccessary as gays have equal rights now.

However I have noticed how whenever an admin is attacked all admins attack them and then close the thread. I personally think the admins do a great job I'm just observing this sort of mob culture which I'm sure Riz could testify to that.

And finally Hibby D just because you're in a miniority of one does'nt make you mad.Just saying :greengrin.All !!!! you wished pal ...:greengrin..maybe 3 out of about 15 ...:greengrin

[da-robster]

Can I explain why admins appear to "attack" in pairs or threes? :greengrin It's because we're online monitoring the threads and then we read something that we feel is unfair; usually a misrepresentation of something we've done. It's not mob-mentality, it's a desire to protect and preserve this site :agree:

I get upset when I read posts criticising our actions - we get it right most of the time but on occasion it appears we don't. No-one likes criticism and sometimes it's hard not to take it personally. But it has to be done or this place will implode - and that would be a tragedy :agree:

Sorry I didn't mean for you to take it that way as I said earlier I think you do a magnificent job. But as well as the admins there also seems to be a backup of other netters and the divisive poster is sort of rounded on and shoved in to a corner to be given a barrage of questions which they can't possibly replie to it's almost worth not posting controversial things at all.

[Jay]

Sorry I didn't mean for you to take it that way as I said earlier I think you do a magnificent job. But as well as the admins there also seems to be a backup of other netters and the divisive poster is sort of rounded on and shoved in to a corner to be given a barrage of questions which they can't possibly replie to it's almost worth not posting controversial things at all.

You're never 12!:dizzy:

[Hibby D]

Sorry I didn't mean for you to take it that way as I said earlier I think you do a magnificent job. But as well as the admins there also seems to be a backup of other netters and the divisive poster is sort of rounded on and shoved in to a corner to be given a barrage of questions which they can't possibly replie to it's almost worth not posting controversial things at all.

I'm of the opinion that if a person chooses to post an opinion that's "controversial" then they should be prepared to take the flak that will undoubtedly follow. As admins our job is to ensure wherever possible that the exchange of opinions is done without resorting to abuse.

Unfortunately last night one poster chose to make a statement in such a manner that many people disagreed with, including myself :agree: That poster has not been banned and his posts are still on view; he is welcome to come on here and answer any questions that were put to him last night. If he chooses not to, then that is fine too.

I really do want my involvement in this issue put to bed now. Never has the term "a thankless task" been more apt :greengrin

[Mibbes Aye]

Sorry I didn't mean for you to take it that way as I said earlier I think you do a magnificent job. But as well as the admins there also seems to be a backup of other netters and the divisive poster is sort of rounded on and shoved in to a corner to be given a barrage of questions which they can't possibly replie to it's almost worth not posting controversial things at all.

I think that's a fair point da-robster and it's easy to think of examples of that happening.

At the same time, if a poster puts forward a strong POV then the sheer size of the board and the amount of people posting means that there is a ready constituency to start challenging him or her.

You see it happening whether it's about Chisholm being a decent player, Tricolours being acceptable at ER, Gordon Brown being utterly more humane than David Cameron (:wink:) or RIP threads being worse than flag debates and Gordon Brown threads.

Message boards tend to polarise debate IMO and the subtleties are often lost. At the same time, the sheer size brings in a huge variety of viewpoints.

EDIT - given you're a PM you could always start a social group, get a debate going and bring in those you would want to contribute :dunno: :greengrin

[Pete]

What's wrong with being a pervert?

...now I'm an offended pervert.

[Mibbes Aye]

What's wrong with being a pervert?

...now I'm an offended pervert.

:rolleyes: Worst kind.....

:greengrin

[(((Fergus)))]

Is it? Who are you speaking for? I'm a 'straight bloke' and I still fail to see what is perverted about it???

"Perverse" is a subjective concept, so one's man's perversion can easily be another man's orthodoxy. Same as repulsion. Some people find homosexuality repulsive while others do not - otherwise they would not practice it.

[LiverpoolHibs]

As an aside, on the gay pride march thread, those condemning the march would not have been argued with had their comments been about an orange march which has been shown time and time again. That thread stank of hypocrisy.

No it didn't, and that's a ridiculous comparison.

[Mibbes Aye]

"Perverse" is a subjective concept, so one's man's perversion can easily be another man's orthodoxy. Same as repulsion. Some people find homosexuality repulsive while others do not - otherwise they would not practice it.

I quoted "Perverted" rather than "Perverse", Fergus.

Very different meanings but a lot of subjectivity in interpretation, I agree.

Most important point is, if anyone's flinging around big words supposedly on behalf of a certain group, shouldn't they be sure that everyone in said group is signed up to the stigmatising?

Sorry, did I say 'stigmatising', meant to say something like 'dirty, rampant bigotry'.

Damn, did I say 'dirty, rampant bigotry'?

Meant to say something like "If you have a problem with homosexuality then homosexuality is the least of your problems" :agree:

(Not directed at you Fergus, at least not yet :greengrin)

[LiverpoolHibs]

"Perverse" is a subjective concept, so one's man's perversion can easily be another man's orthodoxy. Same as repulsion. Some people find homosexuality repulsive while others do not - otherwise they would not practice it.

You don't think that 'perverted' and 'repulsive' are rather loaded words/concepts?

[LiverpoolHibs]

Is that not just your interpretation as an individual though? My interpretation of what 65bd was saying was that the act, to a straight bloke, is perverted. My interpretation was that how 65bd called it was how I saw it. The thought of it to a straight bloke is it is perverted.

As Mibbes Aye says, who are you speaking for here? Speaking as another heterosexual male I don't find it perverted in the least.

Bigots and, outnumbering them, happy apologists for bigots. Ho hum.

[majorhibs]

Is it? Who are you speaking for? I'm a 'straight bloke' and I still fail to see what is perverted about it???

Ach was meaning to a straight bloke like 65bd or myself. That was how I was intending to speak on that post but my brain isnae up to too much multitasking at once, plus I've got to rattle these posts in on my teabreak so dont have too long before getting back to work, where incidentally we all speak to each other by swearing punctuated by the odd word. Getting offended by peoples choice o words around here would not result in much getting done, would end up with a rig full o LiverpoolHibs arguing with the first person who happened to say anything! :wink:

[Sir David Gray]

FFS.

I don't know, I go away for a few days and this board falls apart. It's just as well I'm back now! :bitchy: :wink:

I've seen a couple of the topics that have had to be closed and, although I can't comment on how offensive some of the remarks have been as I haven't read the threads, it's still a real shame because I would have enjoyed contributing to them.

I would have particularly liked posting on the gay pride thread. As someone who has been branded homophobic on here in the past, I spent part of the last few days with a relative, who is in a homosexual relationship, and I had a very enjoyable time with, amongst others, him and his partner.

Anyway, I look forward to disagr...I mean discussing things with people once again. :greengrin

[Jay]

FFS.

I don't know, I go away for a few days and this board falls apart. It's just as well I'm back now! :bitchy: :wink:

I've seen a couple of the topics that have had to be closed and, although I can't comment on how offensive some of the remarks have been as I haven't read the threads, it's still a real shame because I would have enjoyed contributing to them.

I would have particularly liked posting on the gay pride thread. As someone who has been branded homophobic on here in the past, I spent part of the last few days with a relative, who is in a homosexual relationship, and I had a very enjoyable time with, amongst others, him and his partner.

Anyway, I look forward to disagr...I mean discussing things with people once again. :greengrin




Oi I said you were unabusive (dont know if thats even a word) and articulate :greengrin


Musta been the company you've been keeping.



JOKE!!! :tin hat:

[majorhibs]

You don't think that 'perverted' and 'repulsive' are rather loaded words/concepts?

Two completely different words to be taking in a variety of different ways, provided you dont have too "engineered" a brain, eh LH? :wink:

[marinello59]

Oi I said you were unabusive (dont know if thats even a word) and articulate :greengrin


If it wasn't before it is now.:greengrin

[LiverpoolHibs]

Getting offended by peoples choice o words around here would not result in much getting done, would end up with a rig full o LiverpoolHibs arguing with the first person who happened to say anything! :wink:

That sounds like an absolute riot! :greengrin


Two completely different words to be taking in a variety of different ways, provided you dont have too "engineered" a brain, eh LH? :wink:

Oh Christ, are we back to that?

[Jay]

If it wasn't before it is now.:greengrin

:greengrin If in doubt make one up, its probably some form of inabusively, see I am not really thick

[marinello59]

:greengrin If in doubt make one up, its probably some form of inabusively, see I am not really thick

It's not thick. It's unclever. :greengrin

[fergal7]

[QUOTE=LiverpoolHibs;2081717]As Mibbes Aye says, who are you speaking for here? Speaking as another heterosexual male I don't find it perverted in the least.

[B]Bigots and, outnumbering them, happy apologists for bigots. Ho hum.[/Q[/B

Whats a bigot?

[marinello59]

[QUOTE=;2081717]As Mibbes Aye says, who are you speaking for here? Speaking as another heterosexual male I don't find it perverted in the least.

[B]Bigots and, outnumbering them, happy apologists for bigots. Ho hum.[/Q[/B

Whats a bigot?

Maybe somebody with a prejudiced and intolerant view of other peoples views and culture/ lifestyle etc.

There will be better definitions about, google it.:greengrin

[fergal7]

[QUOTE=fergal7;2081750]

Maybe somebody with a prejudiced and intolerant view of other peoples views and culture/ lifestyle etc.

There will be better definitions about, google it.:greengrin

Well put!!!!!!!! Hey I have had a pummeling, stick by what i said but please release mr
e!

[sleeping giant]

Maybe somebody with a prejudiced and intolerant view of other peoples views and culture/ lifestyle etc.

"There will be better definitions about, google it.:greengrin
"A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding attitude or mindset."


So , not tollerating homophobia is being bigoted ?
Does that sound right ?:worms:

[fergal7]

"A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding attitude or mindset."


So , not tollerating homophobia is being bigoted ?
Does that sound right ?:worms:

okey dokey, you were giving it large the other night, what do you have to say?

[marinello59]

okey dokey, you were giving it large the other night, what do you have to say?

:confused:

[Gatecrasher]

i think people should be more respectful of other peoples views, whether they agree with the or not with them shouldnt matter, debates can get out of hand time to time but someones opinion is diffrent from yours that doesnt make them wrong and IMO it doesnt warrent sarcastic and hurtful comments to be made.

[Peevemor]

i think people should be more respectful of other peoples views, whether they agree with the or not with them shouldnt matter, debates can get out of hand time to time but someones opinion is diffrent from yours that doesnt make them wrong and IMO it doesnt warrent sarcastic and hurtful comments to be made.

Of course you're right to an extent, but there are some points of view/statements that merit no respect whatsoever.

Where do you draw the line?

[sleeping giant]

okey dokey, you were giving it large the other night, what do you have to say?

Giving it large where ?

I believe if most males were honest they would admit to being slightly homophobic.

There is a bucket full of folk on here sitting ready to jump onto anyone who goes slightly off the party line.

So , i am homophobic and a few folk on here would call me a racist.
I am also sexist i would imagine.

I find this site extremely predictable sometimes. Someone says a controversial comment (sometimes in the heat of the moment) and there are no end of thread police crawling all over it:rolleyes:

[sleeping giant]

I really dont want to go down the other nights schneganigans but when that fud is calling me a fanny because I have an oponion then barr me

Fergal , i will excuse that comment because i think you must have the wrong person:confused:

I would certainly not have called you a fanny:confused:

I will give you the benefit of the doubt Fergal and assume you mean someone else.

[Betty Boop]

Giving it large where ?

I believe if most males were honest they would admit to being slightly homophobic.

There is a bucket full of folk on here sitting ready to jump onto anyone who goes slightly off the party line.

So , i am homophobic and a few folk on here would call me a racist.
I am also sexist i would imagine.

I find this site extremely predictable sometimes. Someone says a controversial comment (sometimes in the heat of the moment) and there are no end of thread police crawling all over it:rolleyes:
You've got history! :greengrin

[marinello59]

A wee reminder from a jack booted admin. :greengrin

Please just debate the issues without resorting to personal abuse.

[Gatecrasher]

Of course you're right to an extent, but there are some points of view/statements that merit no respect whatsoever.

Where do you draw the line?


that IMO depends on the topic , if someone is supporting the nazi party for example then :bye:

but gay rights marches is a worthy debate, although some of the comments on that thread are uncalled for a healthy debate is to be had

thats why the admins are here, but while the admins are also prone to entering the odd debate they usually let both sides slug it out.

[fergal7]

Fergal , i will excuse that comment because i think you must have the wrong person:confused:

I would certainly not have called you a fanny:confused:

I will give you the benefit of the doubt Fergal and assume you mean someone else.

NO ....... iam not paranoid,,,,,,,,,, Listen I am sorry about the other night, lager is a demon

[sleeping giant]

NO ....... iam not paranoid,,,,,,,,,, Listen I am sorry about the other night, lager is a demon

Dude , i have no clue what you are talking about !! Honestly !!

I just sent you a pm about this but to be honest , i thought you were Fergus (canopy theory thread).:greengrin

To clarify , i didnt call you a fanny.
I said there were some longterm posters showing themselves up as fannies but i didnt mean you.
I didnt even know you existed until this thread (no offence) and like i said i thought you were Fergus (who's posts i enjoy).

[Peevemor]

that IMO depends on the topic , if someone is supporting the nazi party for example then :bye:

but gay rights marches is a worthy debate, although some of the comments on that thread are uncalled for a healthy debate is to be had

thats why the admins are here, but while the admins are also prone to entering the odd debate they usually let both sides slug it out.

In your opinion. Some would disagree.

[EuanH78]

"A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding attitude or mindset."


So , not tollerating homophobia is being bigoted ?
Does that sound right ?:worms:

'I despise what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it'

-Voltaire- ??

EDIT: Bit of research shows the quote as,

'I disaprove of what you say,but I will defend to the death your right to say it'

-Evelyn Beatrice Hall-

Though in my defence, she is paraphrasing Voltaire himself.

[Gatecrasher]

In your opinion. Some would disagree.

maybe so, but common sense should be used :dunno:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Just been reading over the original thread to see what all the fuss was about.

I would say that on the whole, it was a robust debate, which was going pretty well until Plumber got involved. I consider most of what he was posting as right wing sh*t stirring.

It was people like that I was really getting at when I raised the topic of nutter infestation. We were discussing whether it was right for gays to march through the city, with a sub-plot on whether homosexuality is natural or not, and he comes in with:


explain that to the grandparents who were refused custody off their grandchildren who were handed over to two gay guys.

nowadays there is more positive discrimination geared towards gays now, like asians and other ( supposedly ) minority groups that if these people are interviewed for jobs they've more chance off getting them. even the BNP have been told to employ a coloured person or at least interview them for a post.

this countries gone pc mad and there's more chance off discrimination with minority groups now with the favourism that is put their way.

Pretty much the standard, ill thought out, "common sense", "PC gone mad" reply. No attempt to reason, no need to use facts, just regurgitated prejudices.

It's stuff like that I think is nuts, not someone who doesn't like homosexuality because it differs from his beliefs. I think it's nuts that someone cannot admit that their argument is wrong, when it is clearly and politely shown to them that the facts they have based it on are incorrect.

I've no problem with someone who says "gays enjoy positive discrimination", but I have got a problem when a) they are unable to back that point up with evidence, and b) admit that the lack of any evidence (such as legislation) suggests that their point was wrong.

I'm sorry if some people aren't able to express themselves as well as others, but I was told at school if you can't explain something, it's because you don't understand it. I strongly suspect that a lot of the racism and homophobia on here is coming from people who have no real experience of the things they are complaining about.

Now to practice what I preach. I agree that you can't seperate gay people asserting their identity from the likes of the Orange Order asserting theirs. I think both parades are about showing your affiliation to a cause, and providing they can do that without infringing the rights of others, or causing alarm and distress, then they are both entitled to do so.

I believe that the true objective of the Orange Lodge, is to proclaim their faith, which at one time was persecuted. I believe that at the core they just want to be protestants, and are happy for Catholics to follow their faith. I also believe that they have a great problem with "hangers on" who see the marches as a way of intimidating, causing distress and not only asserting their freedom, but saying to others that they are superior.

What can possibly distress someone about a Gay March? Fear of spangly costumes, aversion to women wearing leather, extreme terror of white t-shirts and water bottles? Or is it fear of homosexuality?

[J-C]

My take on almost every subject is that we all have opinions on said subjects, it would be a miracle if everyone agreed with each other and because of this diversity the world is a more colourful and livelier place to be.

Now unfortunately some posters like to have a go or ridicule people who may differ from their viewpoint and tend to gang up on other, leaving admin with the headache of tidying up after all the flack has been given.

All netter have to do is read the rules, they're on the front page, allow others to have their opinions, try to make your discussions articulate as far as you can and stay away from personal abuse and insults.
Jeez, it's not hard to do, my son doesn't come here because of all the bickering and nastiness and prefers the bounce.

[LiverpoolHibs]

Just been reading over the original thread to see what all the fuss was about.

I would say that on the whole, it was a robust debate, which was going pretty well until Plumber got involved. I consider most of what he was posting as right wing sh*t stirring.

It was people like that I was really getting at when I raised the topic of nutter infestation. We were discussing whether it was right for gays to march through the city, with a sub-plot on whether homosexuality is natural or not, and he comes in with:


Pretty much the standard, ill thought out, "common sense", "PC gone mad" reply. No attempt to reason, no need to use facts, just regurgitated prejudices.

It's stuff like that I think is nuts, not someone who doesn't like homosexuality because it differs from his beliefs. I think it's nuts that someone cannot admit that their argument is wrong, when it is clearly and politely shown to them that the facts they have based it on are incorrect.

I've no problem with someone who says "gays enjoy positive discrimination", but I have got a problem when a) they are unable to back that point up with evidence, and b) admit that the lack of any evidence (such as legislation) suggests that their point was wrong.

I'm sorry if some people aren't able to express themselves as well as others, but I was told at school if you can't explain something, it's because you don't understand it. I strongly suspect that a lot of the racism and homophobia on here is coming from people who have no real experience of the things they are complaining about.

Now to practice what I preach. I agree that you can't seperate gay people asserting their identity from the likes of the Orange Order asserting theirs. I think both parades are about showing your affiliation to a cause, and providing they can do that without infringing the rights of others, or causing alarm and distress, then they are both entitled to do so.

I believe that the true objective of the Orange Lodge, is to proclaim their faith, which at one time was persecuted. I believe that at the core they just want to be protestants, and are happy for Catholics to follow their faith. I also believe that they have a great problem with "hangers on" who see the marches as a way of intimidating, causing distress and not only asserting their freedom, but saying to others that they are superior.

What can possibly distress someone about a Gay March? Fear of spangly costumes, aversion to women wearing leather, extreme terror of white t-shirts and water bottles? Or is it fear of homosexuality?

I don't think that's true at all. If you're to be supportive of Gay Pride marches would you also have to give your backing to a White Pride march so as to avoid accusations of hypocrisy?

[Phil D. Rolls]

I don't think that's true at all. If you're to be supportive of Gay Pride marches would you also have to give your backing to a White Pride march so as to avoid accusations of hypocrisy?

I couldn't support something which intimidates, causes alarm, or is meant to restrict the rights of others. That is why I believe the Orange Order should be allowed to parade, as it is about their identity, but also why I think they can't do so, unless they deal with the elements who cause distress to others.

[(((Fergus)))]

You don't think that 'perverted' and 'repulsive' are rather loaded words/concepts?

I don't really know what point you're making. Either you find something "perverted" or "repulsive" or you don't. Both are subjective, i.e., personal responses.

[(((Fergus)))]

Of course you're right to an extent, but there are some points of view/statements that merit no respect whatsoever.

Where do you draw the line?

While certain statements may be lacking in reason, all human beings generally deserve respect therefore if someone can help a person to see where their thinking is wrong, then surely there is worth in that?

Too often, certain opinions are simply mocked out of hand with no reason given for why the thinking is incorrect. Too often this is done simply because the opinion does not conform with the orthodox view, i.e., emperor's new clothes syndrome.

The worst part of it is that the person making the statement can only conclude that there is no reasonable counter-argument and therefore their opinion is correct.

[BroxburnHibee]

You've shattered a few dreams there I think. A good few of us aspired to that (especially the dayglo jackets) :boo hoo::greengrin

And another thing, if our subscription money isn't going on an underground lair, what the hell is it going on :grr: :greengrin

:cheers:

:devil:

[(((Fergus)))]

that IMO depends on the topic , if someone is supporting the nazi party for example then :bye:

but gay rights marches is a worthy debate, although some of the comments on that thread are uncalled for a healthy debate is to be had

thats why the admins are here, but while the admins are also prone to entering the odd debate they usually let both sides slug it out.

Why even that? This practice of having opinions/concepts that are totally off-limits is intellectually lazy and ultimately misleading. People should have more faith in their own power of reason rather than orient themselves around received opinions. (That, after all, is how the nazis got their way :wink:)

[(((Fergus)))]

What can possibly distress someone about a Gay March? Fear of spangly costumes, aversion to women wearing leather, extreme terror of white t-shirts and water bottles? Or is it fear of homosexuality?

If I had children with me, I'd be less wary of an orange march than a homosexual one. I guess it depends on what the weather is like. Pishing with rain, probably OK. Baking hot...discretion is the better part of valour.

[The_Todd]

If I had children with me, I'd be less wary of an orange march than a homosexual one. I guess it depends on what the weather is like. Pishing with rain, probably OK. Baking hot...discretion is the better part of valour.


I'd rather my children knew it was OK to accept gay people as people rather than have them watch hundreds of UJ's and Red Hands of Ulters marching down the street with banners babbling on about 1690 as if it's somehow relevant to anything if I'm being totally honest.

[richard_pitts]

No, different people have different opinions, it doesn't make them nutters. Having a flagrant disregard for human life is more "nutterish".

As an aside, on the gay pride march thread, those condemning the march would not have been argued with had their comments been about an orange march which has been shown time and time again. That thread stank of hypocrisy.

Actually not so, although I did get accused of being a Rangers fan :greengrin

[richard_pitts]

What can possibly distress someone about a Gay March? Fear of spangly costumes, aversion to women wearing leather, extreme terror of white t-shirts and water bottles? Or is it fear of homosexuality?

If I had children with me, I'd be less wary of an orange march than a homosexual one. I guess it depends on what the weather is like. Pishing with rain, probably OK. Baking hot...discretion is the better part of valour.

Oh dear. You would honestly be more concerned about a group of people who dress outrageously walking down the street than exposing your kids to a group of racist bigots with a collective IQ of about 15? :confused:

[Chuckie]

Anyone got a light for my camel ?

[GC]

I've spent the weekend getting drunk and holiday shopping so not really been about, just read through a few of the threads on here and..well what can you say.

Mental does not even describe half of it.

[--------]

I've been on holiday for the last fortnight, and see what happens.

Nutters everywhere.

Ban them all. :grr:

[Steve-O]

I would call that lucky ..my wife thinks sex comes before seven ..:rolleyes:

Seven?? That's definitely illegal :agree:

[(((Fergus)))]

[QUOTE=Fergus;2082133]

Oh dear. You would honestly be more concerned about a group of people who dress outrageously walking down the street than exposing your kids to a group of racist bigots with a collective IQ of about 15? :confused:

Yes, I would. It's not the dressing outrageously that is the problem - I've taken them to the circus before - it's the possibility that same-sex people might be kissing, holding hands or worse. I personally would find that repulsive so I wouldn't want to expose my children to it.

An Orange Walk, if there was no threat of trouble, I'd probably go out of my way with them to see to be honest. There is at least some historical interest there. "Gender politics" I think we'll leave until they're a little bit older.

[J-C]

[QUOTE=richard_pitts;2082393]

Yes, I would. It's not the dressing outrageously that is the problem - I've taken them to the circus before - it's the possibility that same-sex people might be kissing, holding hands or worse. I personally would find that repulsive so I wouldn't want to expose my children to it.

An Orange Walk, if there was no threat of trouble, I'd probably go out of my way with them to see to be honest. There is at least some historical interest there. "Gender politics" I think we'll leave until they're a little bit older.

I cannot believe in this day and age, someone has a problem with another man or woman holding or kissing the same sex in public, To be honest I've never seen any gay man or woman actually kiss in public but holding hands is becoming a lot more frequent nowadays, live and let live.

An Orange walk is a celebration of bigotry at it's best, personally I'd go no where near it and try not to expose my kids to their vile views. I'd rather get some history books out about the troubles in Ireland and let them choose for themselves, it's called education.

[(((Fergus)))]

I cannot believe in this day and age, someone has a problem with another man or woman holding or kissing the same sex in public, To be honest I've never seen any gay man or woman actually kiss in public but holding hands is becoming a lot more frequent nowadays, live and let live.

An Orange walk is a celebration of bigotry at it's best, personally I'd go no where near it and try not to expose my kids to their vile views. I'd rather get some history books out about the troubles in Ireland and let them choose for themselves, it's called education.

Well, just have to follow your own advice then. :wink:

I think children are too young and tender to be exposed to anything of a sexual nature. Homosexuality in particular would be shocking and confusing to them. Maybe if the marchers were just holding hands, children would just assume they were "friends". However, I have no desire to have to explain to them why two grown men are winching - or worse - in the street.

Sectarian aggravation, they know all about as they practice it with their siblings on a daily basis. In that sense, I'm sure they could relate to an Orange Walk. :wink:

[J-C]

Well, just have to follow your own advice then. :wink:

I think children are too young and tender to be exposed to anything of a sexual nature. Homosexuality in particular would be shocking and confusing to them. Maybe if the marchers were just holding hands, children would just assume they were "friends". However, I have no desire to have to explain to them why two grown men are winching - or worse - in the street.

Sectarian aggravation, they know all about as they practice it with their siblings on a daily basis. In that sense, I'm sure they could relate to an Orange Walk. :wink:


I think your qoute button isn't working mate, you've got yourself instead of me as the post quote.:greengrin

ps. just noticed most of the quotes are all scrambled up.
.

[sleeping giant]

I cannot believe in this day and age, someone has a problem with another man or woman holding or kissing the same sex in public, To be honest I've never seen any gay man or woman actually kiss in public but holding hands is becoming a lot more frequent nowadays, live and let live.

An Orange walk is a celebration of bigotry at it's best, personally I'd go no where near it and try not to expose my kids to their vile views. I'd rather get some history books out about the troubles in Ireland and let them choose for themselves, it's called education.

Why can't you believe that ?

Tin Hat on here......Most Gay men are outrageous when grouped together with other gay men.
Thats nots just an off the cuff comment before anyone jumps all over it.
They dont just march either do they ? They try to make a statement and also heckle other males especially those in uniform.



We're here. We're queer..............................:blah:

Sorry but i dont want any of their leather hot pant cladded mob telling my kids its ok.

[Jay]

Why can't you believe that ?

Tin Hat on here......Most Gay men are outrageous when grouped together with other gay men.
Thats nots just an off the cuff comment before anyone jumps all over it.
They dont just march either do they ? They try to make a statement and also heckle other males especially those in uniform.



We're here. We're queer..............................:blah:

Sorry but i dont want any of their leather hot pant cladded mob telling my kids its ok.


SG I think you are generalising. Yep the stereotypical group of gay men are the way you say but I have worked with a few gay men and unless they told you there is no way you would have known. They certainly didn't dress in leather hot pants and sing daft songs. In fact one I had worked with for years and been on a few nights out with and would never have guessed until he told me one day.

I can only go on the gay men I have met and yes there were a few who openly 'celebrated' their 'gayness' and to be honest it did my nut in but no more than the guys who came in on a monday morning spouting about the slappers they had been with that weekend but there were more who were just run of the mill working guys who had a male partner .

[Peevemor]

SG I think you are generalising. Yep the stereotypical group of gay men are the way you say but I have worked with a few gay men and unless they told you there is no way you would have known. They certainly didn't dress in leather hot pants and sing daft songs. In fact one I had worked with for years and been on a few nights out with and would never have guessed until he told me one day.

I can only go on the gay men I have met and yes there were a few who openly 'celebrated' their 'gayness' and to be honest it did my nut in but no more than the guys who came in on a monday morning spouting about the slappers they had been with that weekend but there were more who were just run of the mill working guys who had a male partner .

But you agree they are generally very different in a group.

What is the collective noun for a group of gay men? - A scream? :dunno: :devil:

[sleeping giant]

SG I think you are generalising. Yep the stereotypical group of gay men are the way you say but I have worked with a few gay men and unless they told you there is no way you would have known. They certainly didn't dress in leather hot pants and sing daft songs. In fact one I had worked with for years and been on a few nights out with and would never have guessed until he told me one day.

I can only go on the gay men I have met and yes there were a few who openly 'celebrated' their 'gayness' and to be honest it did my nut in but no more than the guys who came in on a monday morning spouting about the slappers they had been with that weekend but there were more who were just run of the mill working guys who had a male partner .


Jill , i too can only go on my experience but i have had quite a bit:greengrin
I have mentioned before that my wife had a load of friends from that scene and i have met a good few gay people over my time.
I have been out on nights out where i was the only hetro in their company.
Even now , she still has a few who keep in contact.

I never had any bother with these people BUT MOST gay men are very very promiscuous. I know this !! I really really do:agree:
Ive seen it happen. Ive seen them heckle and wind up possible straight men.

Most of the gay men i knew love it if they get a straight man into bed and see it as a conquest.

As i have said Jill , these are not just my views based on prejudice.
These views are based on experience.

I have no doubt there will be folk who dont know any gay folk telling me i am a terrible person. But hey.:greengrin

[sleeping giant]

SG I think you are generalising. Yep the stereotypical group of gay men are the way you say but I have worked with a few gay men and unless they told you there is no way you would have known. They certainly didn't dress in leather hot pants and sing daft songs. In fact one I had worked with for years and been on a few nights out with and would never have guessed until he told me one day.

I can only go on the gay men I have met and yes there were a few who openly 'celebrated' their 'gayness' and to be honest it did my nut in but no more than the guys who came in on a monday morning spouting about the slappers they had been with that weekend but there were more who were just run of the mill working guys who had a male partner .

The leather hotpants comment was about the marches Jill.:agree:

[(((Fergus)))]

"I can't show you this but we just saw a p*nis...on the streets of Toronto" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5jLPwOapAE&feature=fvst)

[Jay]

But you agree they are generally very different in a group.

What is the collective noun for a group of gay men? - A scream? :dunno: :devil:

I personally have never been in a large group of gay men so can only comment on having only seen gay pride marches on the telly, I am sure there are many many gay men who wouldn't be seen dead on a gay pride march. The groups of men on the gay pride marches and parties I have seen on the telly are very different from the groups of people I have socialised with , so yes must be the answer to your question.

[J-C]

Why can't you believe that ?

Tin Hat on here......Most Gay men are outrageous when grouped together with other gay men.
Thats nots just an off the cuff comment before anyone jumps all over it.
They dont just march either do they ? They try to make a statement and also heckle other males especially those in uniform.



We're here. We're queer..............................:blah:

Sorry but i dont want any of their leather hot pant cladded mob telling my kids its ok.

You've obviously never been in Edinburgh on a fri/sat night with hoardes of drunken, screaming hen/stag parties, making a real nuisance of themselves.

The gay community in Edinburgh is located in the aptly named Gayfield part of town, where they have a few bars and nightclubs specially for the gay community. The majority of them are just like any other half drunk reveller at the weekend, you'll always get a few who are way OTT but hey! you'll get them no matter what their sexual persuation.

Homosexual men in their short leather hotpants should be the least of your worries in this day and age, remember, you can't catch it if you get near one, it's not a disease.:confused:

[Peevemor]

You've obviously never been in Edinburgh on a fri/sat night with hoardes of drunken, screaming hen/stag parties, making a real nuisance of themselves.

The gay community in Edinburgh is located in the aptly named Gayfield part of town, where they have a few bars and nightclubs specially for the gay community. The majority of them are just like any other half drunk reveller at the weekend, you'll always get a few who are way OTT but hey! you'll get them no matter what their sexual persuation.

Homosexual men in their short leather hotpants should be the least of your worries in this day and age, remember, you can't catch it if you get near one, it's not a disease.:confused:

But you don't take your kids into town on a Saturday night do you?

[J-C]

But you don't take your kids into town on a Saturday night do you?


You do if you're going to the pictures or for a meal, it all depends how old your kids are I suppose, this is going round in circles and I'm getting bored with everyone repeating the same thing.:greengrin

[Betty Boop]

Why can't you believe that ?

Tin Hat on here......Most Gay men are outrageous when grouped together with other gay men.
Thats nots just an off the cuff comment before anyone jumps all over it.
They dont just march either do they ? They try to make a statement and also heckle other males especially those in uniform.



We're here. We're queer..............................:blah:

Sorry but i dont want any of their leather hot pant cladded mob telling my kids its ok.
Will you object if your kids are taught about Gay Rights issues in the classroom?

[sleeping giant]

Will you object if your kids are taught about Gay Rights issues in the classroom?

My kids are taught to respect peoples feelings BB.

[ancient hibee]

Will you object if your kids are taught about Gay Rights issues in the classroom?
Is that spelt "rights" or "rites"-with today's standards one can't be sure.

[Phil D. Rolls]

But you don't take your kids into town on a Saturday night do you?

Are you saying then that any display of sexuality (gay or straight) is inappropriate for children to see?

[Jonnyboy]

Having just read through this whole thread (I'm old, it takes me longer to catch up these days) I wanted to make a couple of points.

I'm an Admin and I have views on many of the topics debated on .net but if I state them and involve myself in a debate I am accused by some of getting heavy handed because I'm an Admin! Unfair in my view.

On the Gay Pride march thread I engaged in debate with 65bd, plumber and one or two others because I strongly disagreed with their views. Posts were traded back and forth and others that felt equally motivated to do so joined in, with one or two of those being Admins. That seems to have given one or two .netters the opinion that Admins were ganging up on Billy which was not the case. Due to his sweeping generalisation type posts he got a number of quite pointed responses. I know Billy and he knows me well enough to accept I was not 'ganging up on him' but forcfully putting my point across.

And finally as they used to say on News at Ten. To those of you who insist on questioning the actions of the Admin team I paraphrase Hibby D's wise words from earlier in this thread. Folk (except Jambos, Huns and Lesser Greens) are not banned from here just for having and expressing different viewpoints. If someone is banned please be assured that the team have debated the matter and agreed there was good reason for taking that action.

I'll away and lie down now I think

[Peevemor]

Are you saying then that any display of sexuality (gay or straight) is inappropriate for children to see?

I never said any such thing, but I'll answer you anyway - no, within reason.

[Chuckie]

Jill , i too can only go on my experience but i have had quite a bit:greengrin
I have mentioned before that my wife had a load of friends from that scene and i have met a good few gay people over my time.
I have been out on nights out where i was the only hetro in their company.
Even now , she still has a few who keep in contact.

I never had any bother with these people BUT MOST gay men are very very promiscuous. I know this !! I really really do:agree:
Ive seen it happen. Ive seen them heckle and wind up possible straight men.

Most of the gay men i knew love it if they get a straight man into bed and see it as a conquest.

As i have said Jill , these are not just my views based on prejudice.
These views are based on experience.

I have no doubt there will be folk who dont know any gay folk telling me i am a terrible person. But hey.:greengrin


Sir.

Most MEN are promiscuous.

You get a load of gay, straight, bi men, and girls who smoke in the same place and there will be some serious ****ging going on.

I'll be the one in the corner watching nervously, holding a condom.

[sleeping giant]

Sir.

Most MEN are promiscuous.

You get a load of gay, straight, bi men, and girls who smoke in the same place and there will be some serious ****ging going on.

I'll be the one in the corner watching nervously, holding a condom.

You are correct , men are promiscuous:agree: Gay men even more so:greengrin

[Chez]

SG I think you are generalising. Yep the stereotypical group of gay men are the way you say but I have worked with a few gay men and unless they told you there is no way you would have known. They certainly didn't dress in leather hot pants and sing daft songs. In fact one I had worked with for years and been on a few nights out with and would never have guessed until he told me one day.

I can only go on the gay men I have met and yes there were a few who openly 'celebrated' their 'gayness' and to be honest it did my nut in but no more than the guys who came in on a monday morning spouting about the slappers they had been with that weekend but there were more who were just run of the mill working guys who had a male partner .


Have to disagree with that Jill, I've been able to tell they are gay without them even opening their mouth and telling me - body language is powerful communication alone :wink:

[Killiehibbie]

Have to disagree with that Jill, I've been able to tell they are gay without them even opening their mouth and telling me - body language is powerful communication alone :wink:

Add that to the voice and it's a giveaway. Always wondered why do some many gay men feel the need to adopt that voice?

[Chez]

Add that to the voice and it's a giveaway. Always wondered why do some many gay men feel the need to adopt that voice?

:agree: Absolutely - one has to only listen to find out, either with ears or eyes:agree: I knew that my friend's nephew and his pal were gay even before they announced it !!!

[Hannah_hfc]

i think people should be more respectful of other peoples views, whether they agree with the or not with them shouldnt matter, debates can get out of hand time to time but someones opinion is diffrent from yours that doesnt make them wrong and IMO it doesnt warrent sarcastic and hurtful comments to be made.

:agree: Saying that some folk need to be much more aware who could be reading their posts and if it causes offence or not. It's easy not to care when your behind a computer screen but surely theres no harm in taking a second to look over your post and think 'wait if i said this to someone face to face how would they react to this?' i.e. the "perverts" quote in the much talked about gay march - thread.

[New Corrie]

Add that to the voice and it's a giveaway. Always wondered why do some many gay men feel the need to adopt that voice?


That's the bit that gets me. Never been able to work that one out. Very odd, it's like why do Jakey/Junkies speak in that nasal/chav fashion? It's all very strange, each to their own I suppose.

[Chuckie]

I'm such a pervert I **** paedophiles.

Cut out the middle man, go straight to the top.

[Killiehibbie]

I'm such a pervert I **** paedophiles.

Cut out the middle man, go straight to the top.

Only perverted if you don't strangle them first.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm such a pervert I **** paedophiles.

Cut out the middle man, go straight to the top.

You finding it a bit hard keeping up pal? :cool2:

[Chuckie]

You finding it a bit hard keeping up pal? :cool2:

I can't remember.

I'm not your pal.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I can't remember.

I'm not your pal.

Who are you again?

[Chuckie]

Who are you again?

A nutter.

[Phil D. Rolls]

A nutter.

An utter what?

[Chuckie]

An utter what?

This is getting weird.

Peace be upon you brother.