Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 The room will be locked. Only I will have the key. There are no 'authorities'. Rules are: no physical contact. No memes. It wouldnt be very exciting then, it'd be like watching me and CB argue on this forum, surely?
Coxford_lou Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Strange that one, who is so up themselves that having their name said on a forum is a problem? Um, me? I don't want anyone saying my name on this forum. I don't think that's being up myself. I just think it's important to filter what you publish about yourself on the Internet. While I follow a zero filter approach on here, I prefer to stay anonymous. If people are so curious to know who I am, they can behave like a grown up and suggest going for a drink. I'm with Verbal on this one.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Um, me? I don't want anyone saying my name on this forum. I don't think that's being up myself. I just think it's important to filter what you publish about yourself on the Internet. While I follow a zero filter approach on here, I prefer to stay anonymous. If people are so curious to know who I am, they can behave like a grown up and suggest going for a drink. I'm with Verbal on this one. Your name is in your forum name though...
Coxford_lou Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Treat each post on its own merits - it's not a case of 'sides'. If you and Hypo were treating posts for their merits, rather than sides, this thread would be about 50% shorter....
Coxford_lou Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Your name is in your forum name though... No one can track me down based on 'Lou'. I was originally intending to neither declare myself as male nor female, but I blew that quite quickly.
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Strange that one, who is so up themselves that having their name said on a forum is a problem? Nah, not really. I nailed this years ago. He doesn't want his content on here associated with his real life identity. Who can blame him?
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 If you and Hypo were treating posts for their merits, rather than sides, this thread would be about 50% shorter.... That's not true, I feel I always play the post and not the poster.
Coxford_lou Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 That's not true, I feel I always play the post and not the poster. Even though you've grouped a sizeable chunk of us a rabid lefties?
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Good piece by Diane Abbott here for fans of "Red" (arf) Ed. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/13/ed-miliband-leftwing-labour-not-paying-attention?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Even though you've grouped a sizeable chunk of us a rabid lefties? Where have I called you, or a sizeable chunk of posters on here rabid lefties?
Hockey_saint Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Ok, Hypo...What views of yours do I find objectionable? Well, not really any. It was a wrong choice of words on my part. Wes (Or was it Jeff?) asked for proof earlier but I think links were already posted with people like Boris Johnsson complaining about the blanket 20% cut of disabled people from Disability Living Allowance to Personal Independence Plan. I understand that if we tax the wealthy too much they will leave this country for better tax havens but in the same vain, we cannot think that the best way to trim the budget is to do things like remove housing benefit and such from the under 25s as a blanket again (it's in the manifesto). I think the problem, like you like to suggest to me, is a lot of generalisations and assumptions which appear to have been research into very lightly indeed.
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 So I presume when you mentioned me you actually meant the right? Because as I already mentioned, I've supported labour in the past so I don't really consider myself right wing.
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 If you and Hypo were treating posts for their merits, rather than sides, this thread would be about 50% shorter.... Pap does that at every opportunity. Not sure why you just mentioned me and Jeff.
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Pap does that at every opportunity. Not sure why you just mentioned me and Jeff. What a load of shít you talk. I have "orders of magnitude" more opportunities to mock you than I actually exercise. Have you ever read your posts?
Hockey_saint Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 So I presume when you mentioned me you actually meant the right? Because as I already mentioned, I've supported labour in the past so I don't really consider myself right wing. There are right leaning people that agree with policies such as the bedroom tax and there are left leaning people that do. I am aware you said you were a left-wing voter at one point. At one point I voted conservative. But it doesn't stop me thinking that some of the things suggested by the incumbent party are rotten. I don't know, I don't come from the age of screaming lefties ruling trade unions imposing things like closed shops, working to rule and three day weeks. I just grew up in a decade when greed was good and it was all about every man for himself and I just think after what? 35 years of Conservative and quasi-conservative rule we could have done with a change but it's been like this so long that the left has become a dirty word.
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 What a load of shít you talk. I have "orders of magnitude" more opportunities to mock you than I actually exercise. Have you ever read your posts? Why do you think I was referring to myself? You continually play the poster and not the post. I didn't mention myself.
saintbletch Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Interesting blog entry stressing the importance of every vote (and that we need voting reform) as the Tory majority hung on the decisions of only 901 people. http://diamondgeezer.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/majority-2015.html?m=1 The article itself supplies the caveats, so I won't bother.
saint si Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Living on the Flower estate and going to KES, what a way to grow up. Wait - who went to KES?
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 There are right leaning people that agree with policies such as the bedroom tax and there are left leaning people that do. I am aware you said you were a left-wing voter at one point. At one point I voted conservative. But it doesn't stop me thinking that some of the things suggested by the incumbent party are rotten. I don't know, I don't come from the age of screaming lefties ruling trade unions imposing things like closed shops, working to rule and three day weeks. I just grew up in a decade when greed was good and it was all about every man for himself and I just think after what? 35 years of Conservative and quasi-conservative rule we could have done with a change but it's been like this so long that the left has become a dirty word. Much more balanced view from you there in my opinion and I do agree with some of it. I think from that we can agree that not everyone who voted tory are heartless and selfish people.
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Why do you think I was referring to myself? You continually play the poster and not the post. I didn't mention myself. You're grossly misrepresenting my interaction on this site. I said on the other thread that in the vast majority of cases I seek cordiality. You're one of the exceptions, because you're special.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 There are right leaning people that agree with policies such as the bedroom tax and there are left leaning people that do. I am aware you said you were a left-wing voter at one point. At one point I voted conservative. But it doesn't stop me thinking that some of the things suggested by the incumbent party are rotten. I don't know, I don't come from the age of screaming lefties ruling trade unions imposing things like closed shops, working to rule and three day weeks. I just grew up in a decade when greed was good and it was all about every man for himself and I just think after what? 35 years of Conservative and quasi-conservative rule we could have done with a change but it's been like this so long that the left has become a dirty word. As an aside, I don't know anyone that agrees with the bedroom tax...
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 You're grossly misrepresenting my interaction on this site. I said on the other thread that in the vast majority of cases I seek cordiality. You're one of the exceptions, because you're special. We've seen your M.O from the conspiracy threads. When you got challenged- even in a cordial manner- you got sarcastic and personal. Happens a lot (and again I'm not talking about myself, odd that you keep thinking I am.)
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 We've seen your M.O from the conspiracy threads. When you got challenged- even in a cordial manner- you got sarcastic and personal. Happens a lot (and again I'm not talking about myself, odd that you keep thinking I am.) Your M.O:- You're an exceptional boy, hypo.
Torres Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 As an aside, I don't know anyone that agrees with the bedroom tax... I agree with the principle behind it - that the state should not pay for people to live in houses larger than they need when they could be better utilised by those who do. I doubt there are many people who disagree with that. However, to say that there have been issues with the method and the results of implementation would be a bit of an understatement.
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Your M.O:- You're an exceptional boy, hypo. What has that got to do with your behaviour on the forum? Not sure how many times I have to tell you it isn't about me, no matter how many times you try to deflect. I was just saying that you frequently play the poster and not the post. Certainly as much as Jeff and I do on here.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 I agree with the principle behind it - that the state should not pay for people to live in houses larger than they need when they could be better utilised by those who do. I doubt there are many people who disagree with that. However, to say that there have been issues with the method and the results of implementation would be a bit of an understatement. As per most of these types of policies, ****-poor implementation.
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 What has that got to do with your behaviour on the forum? Not sure how many times I have to tell you it isn't about me, no matter how many times you try to deflect. I was just saying that you frequently play the poster and not the post. Certainly as much as Jeff and I do on here. Most behaviour on this site is a reaction to what other people write. If that's the sort of thing you write, don't be surprised if people, myself especially, think you're an irredeemable toerag. "That's funny, hypo. Say that!", said the little, lonely voices in your head. It wasn't, and don't try equating that with the píss-takes you get from me. Never seen anyone go that far on this site before, hypo. That's why you're special.
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 (edited) Most behaviour on this site is a reaction to what other people write. If that's the sort of thing you write, don't be surprised if people, myself especially, think you're an irredeemable toerag. "That's funny, hypo. Say that!", said the little, lonely voices in your head. You still aren't getting it. I wasn't referring to myself and how you react to me, I was talking about your posting in general. Shall I just keep repeating that till you understand? It's nothing to be ashamed of, I do it quite a bit myself but let's not pretend that you react objectively to every post regardless of the poster. Edited 13 May, 2015 by hypochondriac
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 You still aren't getting it. I wasn't referring to myself and how you react to me, I was talking about your posting in general. Shall I just keep repeating that till you understand? It's nothing to be ashamed of, I do it quite a bit myself but let's not pretend that you react objectively to every post regardless of the poster. Then you are even more incorrect. Anyone who gets hostility from me gives it first. With a couple of possible exceptions, I'm just better at it than they are. I'm generally a cordial chap. But yeah. Exceptions.
buctootim Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 I agree with the principle behind it - that the state should not pay for people to live in houses larger than they need when they could be better utilised by those who do. I doubt there are many people who disagree with that. However, to say that there have been issues with the method and the results of implementation would be a bit of an understatement. But the problem is with the legislation not the implementation. The law doesnt distinguish between a single woman living in a four bed detached house for 20 years and somebody whose son has gone to fight in Afghanistan for a year. We all (mostly) know what is right and what is wrong when we see it. On a case by case basis most people might agree, but its practically impossible to draft effective law on that basis.
Hockey_saint Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 As an aside, I don't know anyone that agrees with the bedroom tax... Then I think this may shock...In certain circumstances...I do. I mean, if there's a single person renting, from the council a 3 bedroom house (there's one next door to my grand parents) then yes, I would, as a council only allow him or her to be entitled to the same rate of a single bedroom dwelling. Obviously there are things to take into account, for example has he or she just had a death in the household causing this etc. But such properties are for families. Obviously a caveat for me would be, for example disabled people in 1-2 bedroom places that require things like treatment rooms. But sticking my right-wing cap on, I'd say that they're getting such rentals at a vastly subsidised rent (if they are council and not private) that you really should stick to the rules.
Torres Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Agree entirely Tim, which is why I'm generally against government intervention in anything unless it's absolutely necessary. They invariably make a horlicks of it.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 (edited) Then you are even more incorrect. Anyone who gets hostility from me gives it first. With a couple of possible exceptions, I'm just better at it than they are. I'm generally a cordial chap. But yeah. Exceptions. Erm, really? You have, numerous times, been the first person to be hostile in conversations between us two, you cannot deny that. Example below: It's a justifiable ad hominem when your opponent in a debate is deliberately trying to simplify and twist what has already been said. In your estimation, do you think that UJ was armed with the facts or even the justification to make some of the points he's made? Let's review them, shall we? Accusations of hypocrisy toward the left, because the rich ones aren't paying their money into private healthcare or giving every disposable bit of it away to the poor. Concluding that I'm in favour of spending cuts, when I've already qualified my position. Get the proper rate of corporation tax from companies that are domiciled here, force those that aren't domiciled here to review their tax arrangements. As for spending cuts, I'm all for them in certain areas. Unfortunately, what UJ means is the sort of stuff that we're being told is necessary, which is to squeeze the poor and public services more. How about we stop f**king invading other countries, and save all the cash we're spending to expand the US' economic empire? How about we legislate for out-of-control markets, like housing and banking? If we're talking cuts, let's make sure that people know we're talking about. And that's really been the problem with UJ's input throughout this thread. It's the internal conflict of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about and someone who wants to look like he knows what he's talking about. The uninformed idiot is winning. Example right here. Edited 13 May, 2015 by Unbelievable Jeff
View From The Top Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 As per most of these types of policies, ****-poor implementation. These sort of ideas also lead to poor legislation.
Lord Duckhunter Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 As an aside, I don't know anyone that agrees with the bedroom tax... I agree with applying it to poor people in the private rental sector. Its only poor people in social housing that are dying because of it.
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Erm, really? You have, numerous times, been the first person to be hostile in conversations between us two, you cannot deny that. Example below: Almost entire post is about your content, yet this is your example of me "playing the man". Well in, UJ.
buctootim Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 You guys know this is utterly tedious for the rest of us right? Its what the pm system is for
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 You guys know this is utterly tedious for the rest of us right? Its what the pm system is for I'm involved and I'm bored with it.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 (edited) Almost entire post is about your content, yet this is your example of me "playing the man". Well in, UJ. No, this about you being hostile first...I suggest you read the post and don't spend your time deflecting, again. You said, and I quote: Then you are even more incorrect. Anyone who gets hostility from me gives it first. I'm just saying that is just not true, with the example above. Edited 13 May, 2015 by Unbelievable Jeff
hypochondriac Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 You guys know this is utterly tedious for the rest of us right? Its what the pm system is for If pap had just conceded the obvious in the first place instead of conceding it but calling them exceptions then it wouldn't have got this far or become this dull.
bridge too far Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Put your dicks away, boys. Stop waving them about
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 No, this about you being hostile first...I suggest you read the post and don't spend your time deflecting, again. Hostile first? Dude, you'd posted shítloads of bullshít at that point already! I didn't just come onto the thread thinking "Oh, I'll have a go at UJ for the sake of it". That post was the eventual reaction to your content, which was píss poor.
pap Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Put your dicks away, boys. Stop waving them about I can't even be arsed, btf. UJ trying to be the big man around here.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 Hostile first? Dude, you'd posted shítloads of bullshít at that point already! I didn't just come onto the thread thinking "Oh, I'll have a go at UJ for the sake of it". That post was the eventual reaction to your content, which was píss poor. You said you don't get hostile first. So what if you think it's ********, there's no need to get hostile over it. That's the point, and disproves your holier-than-thou post above. You DO get hostile first, and thats that.
Unbelievable Jeff Posted 13 May, 2015 Posted 13 May, 2015 I can't even be arsed, btf. UJ trying to be the big man around here. Being hostile again are you Pap..?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now