Donald Trump - MAGAtwat news and discussion

[danny la rouge]

I'm quite capable of moaning in my sleep.

 

[Rompipalle]

Thing is, when people post on the politics boards, they can expect to be asked to back up any assertions they make, whether they've been on Urban for a long time or have arrived more recently. More rigour is expected on the politics boards than elsewhere. (In the same way that people are expected to be kinder on the health, relationships, sexuality one aka as nobbing and sobbing due to the subject matter.)

Otherwise there's so much noise that it's difficult to even find the discussion, never mind learn things from it. Take a look at some old threads and you'll see that's always been the convention (and that things used to be way less polite and a lot more heated than they are now... )

I guess this approach isn't always clear when people haven't been here so long and personally I think changing it would be a backwards step.

Yes but you can't demand that someone responds to any insistence upon posting "evidence" anyway - and particularly not if that person has decided to ignore you (that's you in a general sense,, incidentally - not specifically you). It's not really possible to insist on someone replying to your post.

The ignore feature is there for a reason and everyone is free to avail themselves of it if they wish.

 

[Serge Forward]

We moan.

And we moan about the moaning.

And we moan about the moaning about the moaning.

And we moan about the moaning about the moaning about the moaning.

And then we go to bed.

Moaning get.

 

[Smangus]

Why do you say that?

Because bickering and disagreeing is a large part of what make U75 work. Like it or not.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Yes but you can't demand that someone responds to any insistence upon posting "evidence" anyway - and particularly not if that person has decided to ignore you (that's you in a general sense,, incidentally - not specifically you). It's not really possible to insist on someone replying to your post.

The ignore feature is there for a reason and everyone is free to avail themselves of it if they wish.

But that's the crux of it. You're free to post what you want, within certain boundaries (ie not racist, sexist, etc), but you're not entitled not to have posters object to what you post. You're also free to ignore the objections if you like. Nothing will happen to you if you don't respond. Although that requires a certain thickness of skin, and most of us fail on that score.

 

[danny la rouge]

Thing is, when people post on the politics boards, they can expect to be asked to back up any assertions they make, whether they've been on Urban for a long time or have arrived more recently. More rigour is expected on the politics boards than elsewhere. (In the same way that people are expected to be kinder on the health, relationships, sexuality one aka nobbing and sobbing due to the subject matter.)

Otherwise there's so much noise that it's difficult to even find the discussion, never mind learn things from it. Take a look at some old threads and you'll see that's always been the convention (and that things used to be way less polite and a lot more heated than they are now... )

I guess this approach isn't always clear when people haven't been here so long and personally I think changing it would be a backwards step.

It’s also the case in P&P that people get irritated by posters who only post meme-like content, with little analytical content. This will be decried as “content free”. Most of us post such stuff now and again, and that’ll usually be let slide. But if your post count is mostly that, you’ll be told to “take to the bandwidth thread” or otherwise castigated.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Yes but you can't demand that someone responds to any insistence upon posting "evidence" anyway - and particularly not if that person has decided to ignore you (that's you in a general sense,, incidentally - not specifically you). It's not really possible to insist on someone replying to your post.

The ignore feature is there for a reason and everyone is free to avail themselves of it if they wish.

Sure, you can ignore people asking you to back up your assertions but what you can't expect is for them not to do that or for people to only engage to agree with how great your points are.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

One thing I like about here, even if I've been on the wrong side of it more than once, is that we are not entitled not to be offended.

 

[LakieLady]

Voting for Trump, or Farage, or others is a stupid thing to do. Are all of the people who did so generally stupid? Some of them probably are, but then so are some people who voted for Harris etc and some of them (on both sides) won't be.

And of course, some of them are just plain nasty fuckers too.

My brother voted for Farage. He's not stupid, not by a long chalk, but he has significant mental health issues and a massive chip on his shoulder.

 

[emanymton]

And, not to name any names, but if you get fact checked and shown to be wrong then rather that accept it, or just go quiet you have a little paddy about it. We'll don't be surprised if you aren't taken all that seriously in the future. Ther are posters on here who even when I disagree with them I give there posts a lot of weight because they have earned it.

 

[Sue]

Yes but you can't demand that someone responds to any insistence upon posting "evidence" anyway - and particularly not if that person has decided to ignore you (that's you in a general sense,, incidentally - not specifically you). It's not really possible to insist on someone replying to your post.

The ignore feature is there for a reason and everyone is free to avail themselves of it if they wish.

Well of course people can respond or not as they please. But they complain can't really about being asked to back up their points. And rather than using the ignore function, a better solution would be if the longstanding conventions were followed. If people aren't comfortable with those, maybe posting on threads which are more 'anything goes' would be the thing to do?

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Also this might be obvious but anyway, it's ok for the new people to do it too. If you disagree with someone's points go ahead and tell them why they're wrong. That's what it's here for, not 'well fuck off and ignore me if you don't like it'.

 

[HeAthen]

Thing is, when people post on the politics boards, they can expect to be asked to back up any assertions they make, whether they've been on Urban for a long time or have arrived more recently. More rigour is expected on the politics boards than elsewhere. (In the same way that people are expected to be kinder on the health, relationships, sexuality one aka nobbing and sobbing due to the subject matter.)

Otherwise there's so much noise that it's difficult to even find the discussion, never mind learn things from it. Take a look at some old threads and you'll see that's always been the convention (and that things used to be way less polite and a lot more heated than they are now... )

I guess this approach isn't always clear when people haven't been here so long and personally I think changing it would be a backwards step.

I think it's more the way people are asked to back up any assertions they make. Nothing wrong with asking for that at all, but doing it in a constructive manner is surely better for everyone as it'll then encourage discussion rather than pissing people off.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

And, not to name any names, but if you get fact checked and shown to be wrong then rather that accept it, or just go quiet you have a little paddy about it. We'll don't be surprised if you aren't taken all that seriously in the future. Ther are posters on here who even when I disagree with them I give there posts a lot of weight because they have earned it.

And there are posters on here who make points that I broadly agree with whom I quietly facepalm for the awfulness of their arguments.

 

[Sue]

Also this might be obvious but anyway, it's ok for the new people to do it too. If you disagree with someone's points go ahead and tell them why they're wrong. That's what it's here for, not 'well fuck off and ignore me if you don't like it'.

Absolutely this.

 

[Sue]

I think it's more the way people are asked to back up any assertions they make. Nothing wrong with asking for that at all, but doing it in a constructive manner is surely better for everyone as it'll then encourage discussion rather than pissing people off.

danny la rouge is probably the only person on here nice and patient enough to do that consistently.

 

[Sue]

And there are posters on here who make points that I broadly agree with whom I quietly facepalm for the awfulness of their arguments.

You could hear my facepalm from there...?

 

[emanymton]

Well of course people can respond or not as they please. But they complain can't really about being asked to back up their points. And rather than using the ignore function, a better solution would be if the longstanding conventions were followed. If people aren't comfortable with those, maybe posting on threads which are more 'anything goes' would be the thing to do?

No harm in admiting you can't really back something up anyway in my opinion. I can't remember were I saw it, I don't have time and it's just my feeling or whatever are all fine as long as you are honest as it allows people to better judge and assess what you are saying.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

No harm in admiting you can't really back something up anyway in my opinion. I can't remember were I saw it, I don't have time and it's just my feeling or whatever are all fine as long as you are honest as it allows people to better judge and assess what you are saying.

Yeah. I remember someone did this in 2016. Got flamed for it.

 

[emanymton]

danny la rouge is probably the only person on here nice and patient enough to do that consistently.

Well he is the only one with an army of hypnotised dogs doing all the typing for him.

 

[danny la rouge]

danny la rouge is probably the only person on here nice and patient enough to do that consistently.

Oh, I’ve rage posted like the best of us.

 

[Serge Forward]

danny la rouge is probably the only person on here nice and patient enough to do that consistently.

But... but... he's evil!!!!!!11!!

 

[kabbes]

Surely even the most self-unaware individual must be able to see the irony in telling people to just ignore their posts if they don’t like them, then demanding that other people stop making posts that they don’t like.

 

[Rompipalle]

We moan.

And we moan about the moaning.

And we moan about the moaning about the moaning.

And we moan about the moaning about the moaning about the moaning.

And then we go to bed.

Well if moaning is as de rigeur as you imply, perhaps this may turn out to be my spiritual home.

I do enjoy a good old rant from time to time...

Edited for typo

 

[Rompipalle]

But that's the crux of it. You're free to post what you want, within certain boundaries (ie not racist, sexist, etc), but you're not entitled not to have posters object to what you post. You're also free to ignore the objections if you like. Nothing will happen to you if you don't respond. Although that requires a certain thickness of skin, and most of us fail on that score.

Well that was kind of what I was saying...

 

[Wilf]

Cans of cunt

If I was ever in a punk band....

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Well that was kind of what I was saying...

Furious agreement.

We do that a lot.

 

[Rompipalle]

Sure, you can ignore people asking you to back up your assertions but what you can't expect is for them not to do that or for people to only engage to agree with how great your points are.

If you're ignoring them, then the chances are that perhaps you don't see them asking you to back up your assertions.

 

[Wilf]

Taking your time getting me a pint in

They can't find your personal tankard.

 

[teuchter]

I'd like to do an FOI request to see the contents of the secret brainwashing thread that all the AV people were invited to, because I think that might be a factor in some of the inappropriate behaviour we have been witnessing. And, that no meandering stalwarts were invited to it, is discriminatory.