Today's random stupidity story...

[Ethiaa]

You do both know we don't actually give points don't you

[Rover the Top]

Yawn. RTT in straw man argument cause he wants to win points again.

So your response to having it highlighted that you're arguing with a fundamentally different point is to make a childish jibe. So much for the XKCD comic, eh?

[Gibbon]

You do both know we don't actually give points don't you

Could we count warnings as points?

[mrblackbat]

Yawn. RTT in straw man argument cause he wants to win points again.

So your response to having it highlighted that you're arguing with a fundamentally different point is to make a childish jibe. So much for the XKCD comic, eh?

It' s not childish any more than your continous assertions that anything that counters you argument is immediately a straw man.

The number of times you do that or chilidishly retort with "i didn't say those exact words" despite the meaning being put forward being a perfectly reasonable interpretation of your point makes it pointless trying to have a serious discussion with you.

[Rover the Top]

Yawn. RTT in straw man argument cause he wants to win points again.

So your response to having it highlighted that you're arguing with a fundamentally different point is to make a childish jibe. So much for the XKCD comic, eh?

It' s not childish any more than your continous assertions that anything that counters you argument is immediately a straw man.

The number of times you do that or chilidishly retort with "i didn't say those exact words" despite the meaning being put forward being a perfectly reasonable interpretation of your point makes it pointless trying to have a serious discussion with you.

I only have to repeatedly point out you're misrepresenting me because you repeatedly misrepresent me (and others, for that matter). Saying someone is handling a problem in a way that will make it worse is not the same as saying they are at fault for it. Seeking out a specific person online to direct racist and sexist slurs at them is not comparable to making tactless jokes not realising someone with you was offended by them. Fair enough, anyone can misinterpret a messageboard post, but you don't seem to ever accept you've made a mistake and expect others to argue points they weren't ever making. Just because you've decided you've made a "perfectly reasonable" interpretation of what someone was saying, it's not going to make them change their train of thought to what suits you...

Anyway...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-ma ... r-41337127

[mrblackbat]

Your implication certainly comes across as: if Diane Abbott doesn't want to receive racist abuse, she should not put herself to a position of being a senior member of parliament and should walk away from social media. I.E. it's her fault for putting herself in the firing line.

Initially I didn't think that was what you actually meant, but your continued arguing falls into either a) point scoring or b) that's what you actually think.

And you still missed the point that some of the milder abuse might be from people who simply went too far due to the ease of social media/online abuse, to which you think the recipient should just walk away from (i.e. putting up and shutting up ) rather than making it clear to the offenders that it's unacceptable behaviour.

As for misinterpreting message board posts, that certainly seems to be something you yourself seem to demonstrate immunity to....

[Rover the Top]

BBC's Laura Kuenssberg needs a bodyguard at the Labour conference.

[theadore]

People are idiots... you either trust these people to be professional or not. It reminds me of the Rugby fans (I'm sure other sports have it, but it seems more apparent in an insular sport) who think a referee who is a fan of a team should be barred from refereeing a match their preferred team is competing in. If you demand that Journalists pass some arbitrary middle of the political spectrum litmus test then you really are shooting for the bottom.

As an aside - it is interesting considering the Abbott discussion above that Kuenssberg has received evidently much more abuse than her equally right wing predecessor, and more even than the much more brazenly right wing Andrew Neill. It is difficult to think of an explanation beyond her different Gender why this would be the case.

[Rover the Top]

As an aside - it is interesting considering the Abbott discussion above that Kuenssberg has received evidently much more abuse than her equally right wing predecessor, and more even than the much more brazenly right wing Andrew Neill. It is difficult to think of an explanation beyond her different Gender why this would be the case.

I've never been able to discern any political leanings from Neill, but that's by the way. I think it's a bit lazy to say Kuenssberg has been targetted just because she's a woman. She's new in a very visible role at a time when there's an unusual wave of fanatacism towards the leader of a major party. Those fanatics don't like anyone challenging Corbyn and she's at the front of the firing line, probably the most prominent political journalist at the moment, or at least the one with the widest coverage. I think Peston left the post before the frenzy started, and Neill is only familiar to those who watch more dedicated politics programmes.

[Gibbon]

Meanwhile, in the US state department...

[Rover the Top]

Hasn't stupidity always been a prerequisite for American government?

[mrblackbat]

The big question is: which regime are they referring to?

[theadore]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-41813720

Mr Parker says the next step is to get 100,000 signatures so the government will have to debate the issue in parliament.

I think perhaps a long hard look in the mirror should be the next step.

[Gibbon]

How do they know the back is made up of hexagons too?

[mrblackbat]

Trump incriminates himself.

How ironic would it be if his rapidfire approach to twitter finally brings him down....