Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> First of all Lowlander makes an assumption that you drink milk, then after you put him right, he

> posts a very patronising response. Keep going aquarius, keep going and rise above the type of

> assumptions made by the likes of Lowlander (he's not alone in making sweeping generalistic

> statements by the way). If the likes of you or anyone else for that matter has a opinion which

> certain posters don't like, don't be bullied by them. This forum is not their property. Most of

> them post while they're skiing or snow boarding, because its so now darling.


Tee hee. I do love it when I get under your skin, Parkdrive.


I love how you have redefined 'bullying' as 'failing to agree with you'.

Loz, don't you think it's kind of mean to tease someone like that though? A couple of times is maybe just a bit of a laugh, but it's clear you are a much stronger person so sustained teasing is surely bullying.


Sorry if you feel I'm being a busy body, but I'm just feeling uncomfortable reading your posts now and I usually like your arguments, even when I don't agree with them.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Parkdrive Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > First of all Lowlander makes an assumption that

> you drink milk, then after you put him right, he

> > posts a very patronising response. Keep going

> aquarius, keep going and rise above the type of

> > assumptions made by the likes of Lowlander (he's

> not alone in making sweeping generalistic

> > statements by the way). If the likes of you or

> anyone else for that matter has a opinion which

> > certain posters don't like, don't be bullied by

> them. This forum is not their property. Most of

> > them post while they're skiing or snow boarding,

> because its so now darling.

>

> Tee hee. I do love it when I get under your skin,

> Parkdrive.

>

> I love how you have redefined 'bullying' as

> 'failing to agree with you'.



The fact that you keep coming back for more tends to suggest the opposite is true and that I'm getting under your skin. And bullying is bullying whether you like it or not or no mater how you try to disguise it.

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz, don't you think it's kind of mean to tease

> someone like that though? A couple of times is

> maybe just a bit of a laugh, but it's clear you

> are a much stronger person so sustained teasing is

> surely bullying.

>

> Sorry if you feel I'm being a busy body, but I'm

> just feeling uncomfortable reading your posts now

> and I usually like your arguments, even when I

> don't agree with them.


Lady D - There is a distinction between teasing or disparaging poor logic & argument and bullying.


Loz and I were both certainly teasing Parkdrive and Aquarius Moon for their inability to distinguish between opinion, ?moral right? and debate ? both appeared to believe that opinion, assertion and insults constituted an argument.


I don?t think it?s about stronger personalities ? it?s about being able to present a valid and coherent argument. This forum is used to robust debate and any protagonist must be prepared to put up or shut up.


PD & AM instead resorted to personal insult and ?sulking? when Loz and I stated (repeatedly) we were happy to eat Foie Gras and that the relative levels of alleged cruelty did not concern us.


Viz:


PD: ?Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious product never have a funnel shoved down your neck and are force feed?


PD: ?You should have hired the services of a mariachi band to serenade you while gorging your odious delight?


PD: ?MM demonstrating his ignorance by assuming that anyone that puts forward a view contrary his, MUST be a vegetarian?


PD: ?saying that he enjoys FG as if it something to be paraded like a badge or a trophy, and to take some sick pride in announcing it to the world is vile and venomous, same as yourself?


AM: ?Don't worry Parkdrive, I'm used to my comments falling on deaf ears. It's been happening for nearly 3 years. But I won't give up?


AM: ?Your post proves how truly ignorant you are?


AM: If you fighting a losing battle - ?I know how you feel. It's a new year soon, so hang on in there. Somebody may listen one day... And if not... It's their loss?

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>>

> Lady D - There is a distinction between teasing or

> disparaging poor logic & argument and bullying. *And MM clearly is incapable of making that distinction*




> Loz and I were both certainly teasing Parkdrive

> and Aquarius Moon for their inability to

> distinguish between opinion, ?moral right? and

> debate ? both appeared to believe that opinion,

> assertion and insults constituted an argument. *Forcing a funnel down a creatures neck to feed it is morally wrong, & cruel*

>

> I don?t think it?s about stronger personalities ?

> it?s about being able to present a valid and

> coherent argument. This forum is used to robust

> debate and any protagonist must be prepared to put

> up or shut up. * So your comments are always valid and coherent, and nobody else's opinions matter. What a pompous and arrogant person you are*


> PD & AM instead resorted to personal insult and

> ?sulking? when Loz and I stated (repeatedly) we

> were happy to eat Foie Gras and that the relative

> levels of alleged cruelty did not concern us. *alleged cruelty? And we're unable to present a a coherent argument. Your arrogance knows no bounds does it? As for sulking, you guys seem to be unable to take what you take great delight in dishing out. No sulking here MM*

>

> Viz:

>

> PD: ?Lets hope any of you that enjoy this odious

> product never have a funnel shoved down your neck

> and are force feed? - read it again, I hoped that forced feeding was NEVER inflicted on you

>

> PD: ?You should have hired the services of a

> mariachi band to serenade you while gorging your

> odious delight? Yep

>

> PD: ?MM demonstrating his ignorance by assuming

> that anyone that puts forward a view contrary his,

> MUST be a vegetarian? You did demonstrate your ignorance by putting forward an assumption.

>

> PD: ?saying that he enjoys FG as if it something

> to be paraded like a badge or a trophy, and to

> take some sick pride in announcing it to the world

> is vile and venomous, same as yourself? *Yep,can't see how encouraging cruelty can be anything other than vile*


> AM: ?Don't worry Parkdrive, I'm used to my

> comments falling on deaf ears. It's been happening

> for nearly 3 years. But I won't give up?

>

> AM: ?Your post proves how truly ignorant you are?

>

> AM: If you fighting a losing battle - ?I know how

> you feel. It's a new year soon, so hang on in

> there. Somebody may listen one day... And if

> not... It's their loss?



Doubtless you will claim that my comments are neither coherent or valid, as you're always right, at least that's what you'd have us all believe. Over to you.

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Pot and kettle my friend


Try to take it as advice (and it certainly wasn't just aimed at you). It doesn't make you look good when you stop debating the topic and just try to annoy each other.


I suspect my words will fall on deaf ears though.

Jeremy, I know where you're coming from and I agree with you. The trouble is, and has always been, that certain posters treat the EDF as their own plaything. Anyone posting or espousing views that contradict the aforementioned cliques views is met with derision, hostility and ridicule. What said clique do not like and won't put up with, are those that will insist on continuing to post their views despite all if this. Quite frankly that attitude makes me all the more detremined to continue. The bullys on here, at sociaty as a whole, will be given a free rein if we all back off. Have a good 2013.

PD, totally agree that you shouldn't back down if someone is just trying to silence you. Not sure the forum is so cliquey though... certainly not as much as it used to be. The views amongst regular posters are more diverse these days.


I think there are very few absolutes in ehtics and morals. It's hard to say whether something is objectively right or wrong when we all have our own personal values. When arguing a point with someone who has conflicting beliefs, more often than not you'll never reach agreement. But it should be possible to share your ideas without writing off your opponent's views as disgusting, showing off about your ski holiday, or claiming victory by saying that you're getting under their skin.


We all get pissed off and lose our cool from time to time. But it's hard to come out of it without looking bad.

PD Said `"Doubtless you will claim that my comments are neither coherent or valid, as you're always right, at least that's what you'd have us all believe. Over to you".


I have never claimed an absolute certainty about anything - far less that I'm always right. I do however, prefer to enjoy perfectly legal pursuits & pleasures without insult while abhorring the tendency, of some, to believe that freedom of choice must be curtailed to suit the whims and beliefs of others to whom I do no harm.


Anyway it's my turn to set off for a short break on the snow - so cheerio for a few days.

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> I have never claimed an absolute certainty about

> anything - far less that I'm always right. I do

> however, prefer to enjoy perfectly legal pursuits

> & pleasures without insult while abhorring the

> tendency, of some, to believe that freedom of

> choice must be curtailed to suit the whims and

> beliefs of others to whom I do no harm.

>

>To suit the "whims"? Interesting. So my belief that force feeding a live creature is a "whim". Your pursuit is legal, no argument there, as to whether or not your freedom of choice encourages and promotes harm to living creatures, that is another thing entirely. I believe it does and therefore vehemently oppose the continued practice. You see I'm merely exercising my freedom of speech/choice, in the same way that you are free to voice your life choices. I think we've agreed to disagree.

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Parkdrive Wrote:

> > >

> ... And bullying is bullying

> > whether you like it or not or no mater how you

> try

> > to disguise it.

>

> What the-!? Oh, sorry. I could have sworn I just

> heard Udt... must be my cold.



If you "heard" UDT on here, you have more than a cold.

LadyDeliah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Loz, don't you think it's kind of mean to tease someone like that though? A couple of times is

> maybe just a bit of a laugh, but it's clear you are a much stronger person so sustained teasing is

> surely bullying.


Hi, LD. Sorry you read it quite like that. But the libertarian in me gets very annoyed when people just want to go around banning stuff simply because of their own personal moral beliefs. I did leave enough wriggle room in my argument (e.g. factory farming techniques) that, had PD been at all interested in actual debate, some middle ground could have been found. But he was so determined to be dogmatic that it became impossible. Any disagreement with this line was met with some pretty unpleasant replies (as shown by MM above). So, if my pushing back at this was seen by anyone in any way as bullying then I would claim mitigation in that I would probably consider it 'bullying the bully'. I actually think that, with the contribution of others, we built up a pretty good and solid argument in the end.


But, after that, when PD's arguments started to break down and he started to revert to schoolground name-calling and swearing then I suppose I probably did tease him a little too much. The debate had pretty much died and I suppose I could - and should - have refrained from winding PD up so much at that point, but it became a little too tempting for me. And, admittedly, a little too much fun.


> Sorry if you feel I'm being a busy body, but I'm just feeling uncomfortable reading your posts now

> and I usually like your arguments, even when I don't agree with them.


No problem at all. And I shall take your (as usual) good advice and retire from this thread. I think I've made my point and, as you say, any more will not achieve anything positive.

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> maxxi Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Parkdrive Wrote:

> > > >

> > ... And bullying is bullying

> > > whether you like it or not or no mater how

> you

> > try

> > > to disguise it.

> >

> > What the-!? Oh, sorry. I could have sworn I

> just

> > heard Udt... must be my cold.

>

>

> If you "heard" UDT on here, you have more than a

> cold.



And a come-back so completely in character! Loving your work Parky.

Sometimes EDF does feel a bit like a virtual House of Commons with its own little set of self-styled big beasts (or even BSD's). All good old testosterone loaded 'banter' and the inevitable riposte that if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen. I do think that most see it for what it is. Just yawn and close your eyes if it gets too much- its only big boys playground stuff after all. Sometimes it can also be quite amusing. Other times it's well.... awfully predictable.

maxxi Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Parkdrive Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > maxxi Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Parkdrive Wrote:

> > > > >

> > > ... And bullying is bullying

> > > > whether you like it or not or no mater how

> > you

> > > try

> > > > to disguise it.

> > >

> > > What the-!? Oh, sorry. I could have sworn I

> > just

> > > heard Udt... must be my cold.

> >

> >

> > If you "heard" UDT on here, you have more than

> a

> > cold.

>

>

> And a come-back so completely in character! Loving

> your work Parky.



Would hate to disappoint such a luminary as yourself. Shame I can't return the love for your "work"

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • And just by coincidence I tried to scan the cheques in to my account today but the app wouldn't scan so my bank told me I would have to go to a branch or to the post office as they couldn't work out what the problem was. Hah!  
    • No and Wes Streeting is heading in this direction because he knows the NHS is broken and was never built to cope with the demands currently being placed on it. A paid-for approach in some shape or form, and massive reforms, is the only way the NHS can survive - neither of which the left or unions will be pleased about.  
    • Labour talks about, and hopefully will do something about, the determinants of poor health.  They're picked up the early Sunak policy on smoking and vapes.  Let's see how far they tackle obesity and inactivity. I'd rather the money was spent on these any other interventions eg mental health, social care and SEN, rather than seeing the NHS as income generating.
    • I think it's connected with the totem pole renovation celebrations They have passed now, but the notice has been there since then (at least that's when I first saw it - I passed it on the 484 and also took a photo!)
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...