comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 36 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
Winston's debating style is just to keep calling people morons and idiots, ignore their opinions and fabricate things they have said until they give up. Then say 'I'm just debating, can't you handle it', thinking he is really clever and has won something.
Its quite sad really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, except I've debated with lots of people and not done that.
The fact is that you said something stupid.
Now you're crying because I called you out on it. Priick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you say so. An insult with every post from you.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy: Reigning English, European & World Champions (U1396)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
Come on Winston you're slacking!!!!!
I'm sure you can get to 20 pages by the end of the day.
Likes seeing his words in print does this one. And he always wants the last word. like some spoilt brat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The irony of the guy who goes round calling people idiots and morons, fabricated things people say, is unaccepting of others viewpoints and has to get the last word in any discussion saying that, is most definitely lost on you.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
comment by Cal Neva (U11544)
posted 5 minutes ago
Wow still going on. Won't read back
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I was surprised too. I shouldnt have been surprised Winston was still going though.
Another thread ruined by Winston
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 36 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
Winston's debating style is just to keep calling people morons and idiots, ignore their opinions and fabricate things they have said until they give up. Then say 'I'm just debating, can't you handle it', thinking he is really clever and has won something.
Its quite sad really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, except I've debated with lots of people and not done that.
The fact is that you said something stupid.
Now you're crying because I called you out on it. Priick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you say so. An insult with every post from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you can’t accept having your opinion labelled as stupid then that’s your problem.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy: Reigning English, European & World Champions (U1396)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
Come on Winston you're slacking!!!!!
I'm sure you can get to 20 pages by the end of the day.
Likes seeing his words in print does this one. And he always wants the last word. like some spoilt brat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The irony of the guy who goes round calling people idiots and morons, fabricated things people say, is unaccepting of others viewpoints and has to get the last word in any discussion saying that, is most definitely lost on you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really have thrown your toys out of the pram today haven’t you?
This was a decent debate until two people made the most stupid comment I’ve seen on here all year.
Another thread that Klopptimus joins to just talk about me.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
Admin should change Winston's username to < popcorn >
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying it descended into insults because I disagreed with you.
Yet you accuse other posters of being immature.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy: Reigning English, European & World Champions (U1396)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
Come on Winston you're slacking!!!!!
I'm sure you can get to 20 pages by the end of the day.
Likes seeing his words in print does this one. And he always wants the last word. like some spoilt brat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The irony of the guy who goes round calling people idiots and morons, fabricated things people say, is unaccepting of others viewpoints and has to get the last word in any discussion saying that, is most definitely lost on you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really have thrown your toys out of the pram today haven’t you?
This was a decent debate until two people made the most stupid comment I’ve seen on here all year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A decent debate.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying it descended into insults because I disagreed with you.
Yet you accuse other posters of being immature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I’m saying you took this away from the subject and started making it personal.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying it descended into insults because I disagreed with you.
Yet you accuse other posters of being immature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I’m saying you took this away from the subject and started making it personal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I didn't. I just disagreed with you on whether something was whataboutery and tried to get you to engage with the point. You were the only one to get personal and resort to insults.
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
Whatabout them adding chillax to the dictionary?
That crime against language seems to have gone unnoticed.
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 35 minutes ago
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You were trying to avoid it though. You didn't answer it once and still haven't. You claimed it was whataboutery to not answer it.
You resorted to insults when called out for it, rather than trying to engage in the discussion. You basically just want everyone to agree with you and can't handle it when people don't.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 35 minutes ago
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You were trying to avoid it though. You didn't answer it once and still haven't. You claimed it was whataboutery to not answer it.
You resorted to insults when called out for it, rather than trying to engage in the discussion. You basically just want everyone to agree with you and can't handle it when people don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn’t trying to avoid it.
I dismissed it as a ridiculous comparison.
You are the cause of this going downhill, not me.
Nomophobia is the irrational fear of being without your mobile phone or being unable to use your phone for some reason, such as the absence of a signal or running out of minutes or battery power.
That one's interesting
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 35 minutes ago
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You were trying to avoid it though. You didn't answer it once and still haven't. You claimed it was whataboutery to not answer it.
You resorted to insults when called out for it, rather than trying to engage in the discussion. You basically just want everyone to agree with you and can't handle it when people don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn’t trying to avoid it.
I dismissed it as a ridiculous comparison.
You are the cause of this going downhill, not me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. If that's what you want to believe.
It’s the truth.
Open up that tiny mind of yours to the idea that I genuinely believe it’s a ridiculous and flawed comparison.
If you can do that, we can have a sensible discussion.
Any of you lads listen to the Fighting Co ck they've done a podcast on the Y word which was interesting but incredibly uncomfortable listening (a very much posh middle class journo telling everyone that it's acceptable in the context)
“ a very much posh middle class journo telling everyone that it's acceptable in the context”
It is
I think we can conclude that it is acceptable tbh.
What would be distasteful is if that same journalist is telling people what they should and shouldn't be offended by.
comment by MKspur (U9129)
posted 7 minutes ago
“ a very much posh middle class journo telling everyone that it's acceptable in the context”
It is
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His views are really archaic, even when questioned "you're not Jewish you can't comprehend it's use" he had no real answer
Sign in if you want to comment
Y!D - Now in the Oxford Dictionary
Page 12 of 13
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 36 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
Winston's debating style is just to keep calling people morons and idiots, ignore their opinions and fabricate things they have said until they give up. Then say 'I'm just debating, can't you handle it', thinking he is really clever and has won something.
Its quite sad really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, except I've debated with lots of people and not done that.
The fact is that you said something stupid.
Now you're crying because I called you out on it. Priick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you say so. An insult with every post from you.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy: Reigning English, European & World Champions (U1396)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
Come on Winston you're slacking!!!!!
I'm sure you can get to 20 pages by the end of the day.
Likes seeing his words in print does this one. And he always wants the last word. like some spoilt brat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The irony of the guy who goes round calling people idiots and morons, fabricated things people say, is unaccepting of others viewpoints and has to get the last word in any discussion saying that, is most definitely lost on you.
posted on 13/2/20
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Cal Neva (U11544)
posted 5 minutes ago
Wow still going on. Won't read back
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I was surprised too. I shouldnt have been surprised Winston was still going though.
posted on 13/2/20
Another thread ruined by Winston
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 36 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
Winston's debating style is just to keep calling people morons and idiots, ignore their opinions and fabricate things they have said until they give up. Then say 'I'm just debating, can't you handle it', thinking he is really clever and has won something.
Its quite sad really.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh, except I've debated with lots of people and not done that.
The fact is that you said something stupid.
Now you're crying because I called you out on it. Priick.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you say so. An insult with every post from you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you can’t accept having your opinion labelled as stupid then that’s your problem.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy: Reigning English, European & World Champions (U1396)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
Come on Winston you're slacking!!!!!
I'm sure you can get to 20 pages by the end of the day.
Likes seeing his words in print does this one. And he always wants the last word. like some spoilt brat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The irony of the guy who goes round calling people idiots and morons, fabricated things people say, is unaccepting of others viewpoints and has to get the last word in any discussion saying that, is most definitely lost on you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really have thrown your toys out of the pram today haven’t you?
This was a decent debate until two people made the most stupid comment I’ve seen on here all year.
posted on 13/2/20
Another thread that Klopptimus joins to just talk about me.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
posted on 13/2/20
Admin should change Winston's username to < popcorn >
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying it descended into insults because I disagreed with you.
Yet you accuse other posters of being immature.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 2 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 hour, 20 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 40 minutes ago
comment by Keep It Greasy: Reigning English, European & World Champions (U1396)
posted 2 hours, 39 minutes ago
Come on Winston you're slacking!!!!!
I'm sure you can get to 20 pages by the end of the day.
Likes seeing his words in print does this one. And he always wants the last word. like some spoilt brat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The irony of the guy who goes round calling people idiots and morons, fabricated things people say, is unaccepting of others viewpoints and has to get the last word in any discussion saying that, is most definitely lost on you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You really have thrown your toys out of the pram today haven’t you?
This was a decent debate until two people made the most stupid comment I’ve seen on here all year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A decent debate.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying it descended into insults because I disagreed with you.
Yet you accuse other posters of being immature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I’m saying you took this away from the subject and started making it personal.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 10 seconds ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 hour, 47 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 hours, 1 minute ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 23 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 49 seconds ago
The Lambeau Leap (U21050)
No, it's whataboutery.
Two entirely different situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not particularly. If a white person was part of a group with a lot of black people and they started referring to the group as 'N Army' in public; it would be heavily frowned upon. In fact, if the black community took offence, most people would be quick to condemn it.
Bringing up equivalent examples when discussing a subject is a perfectly legitimate way to justify a point. You only call it whataboutery so you can avoid discussing it,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
They're two entirely different situations - rather than try to agree a blueprint that we can apply to any situation regarding a potentially offensive word, we should discuss each situation on its merits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its not whataboutery. People should do both. You can't ignore a comparison just because it doesn't suit your argument.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is whataboutery.
It's trying to refute an argument with an entirely different and unrelated point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I'm not. The situation used is drawing a comparison to another situation which is similar and how behaviour would be different.
That is not whataboutery. It is showing a double standard. It is up to you in the discussion to refute that and explain why you think this situation is different to the standard set in the other one. Saying 'whataboutery' over and over again is just a way to shut down that discussion as you feel uncomfortable going down that path.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Just going to post this here.
This is why it descended into insults, Tamwolf. Take a look at yourself before accusing me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you're saying it descended into insults because I disagreed with you.
Yet you accuse other posters of being immature.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, I’m saying you took this away from the subject and started making it personal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No I didn't. I just disagreed with you on whether something was whataboutery and tried to get you to engage with the point. You were the only one to get personal and resort to insults.
posted on 13/2/20
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
posted on 13/2/20
Whatabout them adding chillax to the dictionary?
That crime against language seems to have gone unnoticed.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 35 minutes ago
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You were trying to avoid it though. You didn't answer it once and still haven't. You claimed it was whataboutery to not answer it.
You resorted to insults when called out for it, rather than trying to engage in the discussion. You basically just want everyone to agree with you and can't handle it when people don't.
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 35 minutes ago
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You were trying to avoid it though. You didn't answer it once and still haven't. You claimed it was whataboutery to not answer it.
You resorted to insults when called out for it, rather than trying to engage in the discussion. You basically just want everyone to agree with you and can't handle it when people don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn’t trying to avoid it.
I dismissed it as a ridiculous comparison.
You are the cause of this going downhill, not me.
posted on 13/2/20
Nomophobia is the irrational fear of being without your mobile phone or being unable to use your phone for some reason, such as the absence of a signal or running out of minutes or battery power.
That one's interesting
posted on 13/2/20
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 39 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 35 minutes ago
Saying that I’m trying to shut down the discussion because I feel uncomfortable is not debate. It’s just going to annoy anyone.
Same about saying I’m trying to avoid the matter.
Same about saying I have double standards.
If you think that’s acceptable but then get on your high horse when I say that I think what you said is stupid, then you’re surely beyond help.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You were trying to avoid it though. You didn't answer it once and still haven't. You claimed it was whataboutery to not answer it.
You resorted to insults when called out for it, rather than trying to engage in the discussion. You basically just want everyone to agree with you and can't handle it when people don't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn’t trying to avoid it.
I dismissed it as a ridiculous comparison.
You are the cause of this going downhill, not me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok. If that's what you want to believe.
posted on 13/2/20
It’s the truth.
Open up that tiny mind of yours to the idea that I genuinely believe it’s a ridiculous and flawed comparison.
If you can do that, we can have a sensible discussion.
posted on 14/2/20
Any of you lads listen to the Fighting Co ck they've done a podcast on the Y word which was interesting but incredibly uncomfortable listening (a very much posh middle class journo telling everyone that it's acceptable in the context)
posted on 14/2/20
“ a very much posh middle class journo telling everyone that it's acceptable in the context”
It is
posted on 14/2/20
I think we can conclude that it is acceptable tbh.
What would be distasteful is if that same journalist is telling people what they should and shouldn't be offended by.
posted on 14/2/20
comment by MKspur (U9129)
posted 7 minutes ago
“ a very much posh middle class journo telling everyone that it's acceptable in the context”
It is
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His views are really archaic, even when questioned "you're not Jewish you can't comprehend it's use" he had no real answer
Page 12 of 13
9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13