ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
Nice to know that you judge one of the seminal pop-punk bands to come out of the punk explosion to be shit. Yet another thing to mark you conspicuously as a tasteless, meretricious arsewipe.
campaign against welfare cuts and poverty
- Thread starter Blagsta
- Start date
Nice to know that you judge one of the seminal pop-punk bands to come out of the punk explosion to be shit. Yet another thing to mark you conspicuously as a tasteless, meretricious arsewipe.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
it's somewhat of a narrative for you, these claims of bullying, and not just as Awesome Wells, but in your prior incarnation too. Has it ever occurred to you that the problem isn't about bullying, it's about your inability to take criticism, and your need to believe you're being bullied, in order to preserve your sense of identity? You wouldn't be the first to enjoy constructing a martyr complex for themselves.
At least I don't believe in supernatural bullshit and bully people. You judgemental twat.
No, the problem is bullying. Something that is clearly tolerated on this website.
No wonder the left can't get it together.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Could you post up your outraged resignation letter to people you've never met about someone who isn't in their party explaining why you have to leave please?
Why would I do that? To which people are you referring?
What does this mean though? IDS will just ignore it like he does everything; the DWP still hasn't disclosed the names of the Workfare providers it has on record despite the information commissionare saying they have to (iirc).
Wasn't there an earlier case where someone sought clarification after getting harassment regarding their jobsearch. It was to do with what was considered reasonable, in terms of the JSA regulations vs. the JC telling them to apply for silly numbers of jobs (setting them up to fail, the whole point of all this). A judge or decision maker of some kind said that it was reasonable to take 3 or 4 steps each week, not ten times that as the JC seemed to think they had to (and failed to do).
Wasn't there an earlier case where someone sought clarification after getting harassment regarding their jobsearch. It was to do with what was considered reasonable, in terms of the JSA regulations vs. the JC telling them to apply for silly numbers of jobs (setting them up to fail, the whole point of all this). A judge or decision maker of some kind said that it was reasonable to take 3 or 4 steps each week, not ten times that as the JC seemed to think they had to (and failed to do).
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You keep claiming that you don't bully people, but you do, in the very way you attack anyone who doesn't agree with you, and in the way you arrogantly dismiss any idea that isn't yours.
And you too believe in "supernatural bullshit". Atheism is your religion, and Dawkins one of your g-ds.
I don't attack everyone who disagrees with me. I have attacked some people, but not just for disagreeing with nor, nor have i 'arrogantly' dismissed every idea that isn't mine. In fact I didn't even dismiss your views in that witchcraft thread wherein you decided to attack me for no reason (you certainly haven't provided one despite being asked) and I did not even question your beliefs never mind ridicule them.
Ironic that you think you have the right to criticise the conduct of other users given your own attitude to a great many other posters that I have seen.
And atheism isn't a religion; it is a position. That's all. The only god i worship is geezer butler
Last edited:
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
You don't do reflexivity, do you? If you did, you'd realise how hilariously ironic such a post is, coming from you.
"comingfrom me"
So, not patronising at all then. And again as dishonest and evasive as ever. I asked you several times, quite openly and quite politely, to explain what your problem was. All you could do then, as now, is resort to this kind of silly provocative rhetoric.
I've no idea what reflexivity is or whether my post encompassed it or even whether that is 'hilariously ironic'. Does it matter? Not really.
This much is apparent.
Very much. If you aren't able to reflect upon your own interactions with other people to see where you may be going wrong, you will repeat the same mistakes over and over.
But I've tried to go through this with you, and it's hopeless, as you believe you are never wrong.
Instead of attacking everyone who offers you advice, perhaps try listening to them, you might learn something.
Actually you haven't.
What do you think I am wrong about?
What advice did violentpanda offer?
Why are you ignoring my request for him to simply explain his position? You are being extremely selective in your reading of the situation, which is entirely the problem: noone has ever said that butchersapron should stop bullying me, noone has ever even conceded the point that, after being asked to stop, he ought to back off. Yet these people continue, and here we are with another member of the peanut gallery attacking me completely unprovoked. I have never insulted violentpanda at all and yet, all of a sudden, he lashes out at me. Yet you seem to ignore that, why?
I'm not going to get into a "prove this, prove that" discussion with you, as it's ultimately futile.
All I'm saying is that you could do with some self-reflection as to why you immediately go on the offensive whenever anyone questions anything you post, but I've said this to you before anyway, and it was ignored. (And no, I'm not going to prove that either).
So you set me up to fail: it's only futile because you refuse to engage with the questions I asked you. Neither of which were remotely offensive.
I said that I didn't know what reflexivity was; in response you insulted me as a prelude to telling me my failings. Now when I ask you to back up your claims you decide you take your ball and go home?
Now you're telling me I need to self reflect? But you don't explain why this is necessary and you refuse to see both sides. Show me where I went on the offensive with violentpanda? Explain to me why you ignore the bullying behaviour of other forum users, but feel it necessary to criticise my behaviour?
That is not just ironic, it's very insulting. You accused me of not following advice in direct reply to me responding to violentpanda, who refuses to be honest, and then when I ask you to qualify your statements and back them up, you don't like it? That's fair to you is it?
You have not 'been through anything' with me. I have one PM from you and that's it, and it isn't going over anything. If all people can do on this site is be dishonest and evasive and refuse to even back up their own statements you might as well ban me. That is exactly the kind of behaviour i regard as bullying.
Whatever, you don't get 'it', it's obvious to everyone else that you attack when your position is threatened, and it's obvious to everyone else that you can't see this, and are unwilling to do anything about it.
When you boil down all of the issues you have with this site, it's always everyone else, it's never you. That is what you don't get.
If it was an 80/20 split, where you have even once (just once) realised you were in the wrong, then people would be more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Alas, it's never you, you have never admitted you were wrong once, ever, to my knowledge in any discussion on this forum, all you do is throw out the name of some random fallacies you read about and go into full on denial. (*awaits straw man accusation*).
Don't you think it's odd that through all of your posts, you have never changed your position on anything, and always go on the offensive when anyone has a different opinion to you?
And no, again, I'm not going to find proof of this, in case you want to ask.
When you boil down all of the issues you have with this site, it's always everyone else, it's never you. That is what you don't get.
If it was an 80/20 split, where you have even once (just once) realised you were in the wrong, then people would be more willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. Alas, it's never you, you have never admitted you were wrong once, ever, to my knowledge in any discussion on this forum, all you do is throw out the name of some random fallacies you read about and go into full on denial. (*awaits straw man accusation*).
Don't you think it's odd that through all of your posts, you have never changed your position on anything, and always go on the offensive when anyone has a different opinion to you?
And no, again, I'm not going to find proof of this, in case you want to ask.
You've just dismissed everything I've said in the most offhand way. Do you not see how this is exactly the point I'm making?
These are judgements. You expect me to blindly agree with them despite refusing to justify your position and then have the nerve to dismiss what I say? What position are you referring to? Again, you are refusing to back up what you say. How can anyone possibly respond to a position such as this? All you are doing is demanding that I agree with you unconditionally whilst accusing me of being intransigent. This is completely hypocritical. Then when I point this oiut you dismiss it by saying "whatever". That's childish.
I understand the point, I don't agree with it which is why you need to back up your position. Whenever someone on this site is asked to evidence their position they respond with abuse. Same thing with the feminist thread. Accusations were made against my behaviour, I asked for evidence, I got abuse. That's fair to your mind is it? Or will the answer just be "whatever"? Not much point even entering into a dialogue is there if that's your attitude, which is itself insulting.
If what was and 80/20 split. I don't knoiw what you are referring to because you aren't backing up what you say.
You are also completely ignoring everything i've said. This suggests you are ok with users bullying others. 12 months of butchersaprons nonsense and still you ignore the fact that the whole process was instigated by him yet when I lose my patience with it - after asking him to stop quite reasonably (and trying to raise it with moderators who don't seem to want to moderate) - I'm the bad guy? If that's your position then you really aren't fit to be contributing here.
To your knowledge.
I haven't accused anyone of making a strawman unless I feel they have done so. Do you not see again how provocative you are being by saying things like " (*awaits straw man accusation*)"
Are you saying you have read every post I have made? Do you really not understand why fallacious arguments are a problem or why it's dishonest (not to say even more fallacious) to criticise someone for pointing out when they are being, for example, straw manned? Is it acceptable to you to misrepresent other people's points and then try and justify it by further insulting them after they point out the fallacy being used? Is that honest in your opinion?
Are you really saying that people who, assuming this is true (i can't remembver everything I have posted so I cann't say whether or not it is a true statement), don't change their position deserve to be bullied? Again you need to provide an example. Why should I change my position? I would only need to do that if new evidence presented itself that merited it? I shouldn't have to change my position to suit the mob. What is inherently wrong with believing my position is correct? Noone takes a position they don't think is correct do they.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Just stop. Or go.
What sense? What exactly do you want me to say? I've asked you for examples, evidence and I've asked you to back up your position. I have engaged directly with what you've said, and yet again you dismissed me. How then is this you trying to get me to see anything? It's only futile because you are refusing to engage.
Whatever I say next, no matter how well quoted or sourced, will not make you change your position. Ergo, it is pointless.
Jesus Christ himself could come down from heaven and tell you that you were wrong, with printed examples, and it wouldn't be enough. Ergo, it is pointless trying to engage you in a debate. You consider yourself infallible, it is pointless me trying. I've tried before (and no, I'm not going to quote where), and it was pointless then, and it's pointless now.
Frankie Jack
Not a bloke..
I don't often get the chance to read this thread anymore. When I do, I really don't expect this shite!
So you've been asked to provide evidence after making a number of claims about me. You've repeatedly said talking to me is futile despite my responding directly to everything you've said. But before I can even respond to the evidence you keep refusing to provide, and continually avoiding my questions including requests to comment on the behaviour of others (you see fit to comment on mine), you've already made up your mind and decided that you know how i'm going to respond.
And you see nothing wrong with that at all?
By all means chuck your toys out the pram. I've engaged with you directly, despite being accused of doing otherwise. I don't think you're in any position to criticise my conduct at all.
I don't agree to disagree at all. You've made a number of claims about me and refused to justify them why should I agree to that? You haven't even made your case in respect of any 'ways'.
You begain this exchange and now, again, I'm getting clobbered for it. Nice.
BigTom
Well-Known Member
http://www.motherwelltimes.co.uk/ne...ties-with-controversial-work-scheme-1-3603623
some good workfare news:
LAMH recycling - the firm that someone was sent back to after being there on the old Future Jobs Fund scheme's job - has pulled out after the protests against their involvement.
This is why they won't release the names, and why we need to keep pushing at the providers we do still know about.
some good workfare news:
LAMH recycling - the firm that someone was sent back to after being there on the old Future Jobs Fund scheme's job - has pulled out after the protests against their involvement.
This is why they won't release the names, and why we need to keep pushing at the providers we do still know about.
ViolentPanda
Hardly getting over it.
In fact, not only has the deficit not been reduced, we're deeper in the hole than when the coalition came to power, and as Ed Balls has promised to stick to coalition spending limits/austerity policy, we'll probably go even deeper in the hole with Labour - you can't build a steady economy when people are having to think twice about every purchase, and certainly not when social security, wages and employment policy make sure there's less cash floating around.
Similar threads
- Poll
