Where are you on the political spectrum?

[Pocketman]

28 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

The fundamental question people are avoiding is this: is it ok to ban someone without warning if they haven’t broken any rules just because some posters find someone annoying? 

if the answer is yes then are we any better than, say, Mumsnet?

I think the issue is more about someone trolling rather than being annoying. If you are posting that number of posts in one section (the pattern on P&B is always focusing on the Pol section rather than any football section on a football message board), constantly talking about your own block list, introducing a practice of "retaliatory red dotting" and responding to someone with every second post by saying "please let's be civil", then you are of course looking to illicit a reaction and are trolling. 

I get that it is subjective as to determining who is trolling and who is merely annoying, and perhaps there should be more transparency around how that distinction is made by the mods; but at the end of the day Steiner was a troll - and an increasingly tedious one at that. 

Hopefully his next incarnation is less tedious. 

[welshbairn]

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/04/arts/television/taylor-greene-twitter-late-night-tv-shows.html

[Thorongil]

13 minutes ago, KingRocketman II said:

I think the issue is more about someone trolling rather than being annoying. If you are posting that number of posts in one section (the pattern on P&B is always focusing on the Pol section rather than any football section on a football message board), constantly talking about your own block list, introducing a practice of "retaliatory red dotting" and responding to someone with every second post by saying "please let's be civil", then you are of course looking to illicit a reaction and are trolling. 

I get that it is subjective as to determining who is trolling and who is merely annoying, and perhaps there should be more transparency around how that distinction is made by the mods; but at the end of the day Steiner was a troll - and an increasingly tedious one at that. 

Hopefully his next incarnation is less tedious. 

So why no warning?

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, Bob Mahelp said:

I agree completely. But it's the job of government to create frameworks and mechanisms to make sure the weakest in society don't get left behind.....the Tories here aspire to be the Republicans in the USA. They don't give a fvck about the poorest and weakest. 

I want more investment in health and far less in 'defence'. I don't want nuclear wseapons in my country. But I want myself and my family to be comfortably off, as do most.

I don't consider myself perfect, just normal(ish). 

"I've got a buddy who delivers the post
Up and down the northeast coast
When The Clash came to town he never missed 'em
He still wants to bust the system

But he has to go to work
That doesn't mean he's some kind of a jerk
Put food on the table, you know how that feels
Doesn't mean he's lost his ideals"

(Billy Bragg)

In a fair society, we would all have a decent standard of living. No nukes either, obviously, and why exactly was Corbyn ridiculed for pointing out that war, weapons, prisons and unemployment do not make a happy society, but health, inspiration, high employment and education for all do.

As the late and undeniably great Tony Benn said, if we can find the money to kill people, we can find the money to help people.

[Pocketman]

1 hour ago, Thorongil said:

So why no warning?

presumably because he hadn't on one occasion over-stepped the mark or over-reacted. if your reason d'être for being on this forum was to troll then a warning wouldn't really be of much use. 

[Granny Danger]

2 hours ago, Thorongil said:

The fundamental question people are avoiding is this: is it ok to ban someone without warning if they haven’t broken any rules just because some posters find someone annoying? 

if the answer is yes then are we any better than, say, Mumsnet?

It’s shocking! You should resign P&B in protest.

[HTG]

2 hours ago, Thorongil said:

Under Salmond’s Government, poverty and inequality in Scotland reduced significantly. Under Sturgeon, poverty and inequality have increased. 

 

That may be the case - I'll take your word for it although I'd prefer the word "significantly" to be defined.  But both need to be examined within the prism of UK govt given the influence UK policy has on devolved administrations.

Salmond was governing through the period where there was a Labour govt between 2007 and 2010 followed by a coalition which helped keep in check the worst excesses of the Tories. 

Sturgeon has mostly had to manage a relentless shift to the right at Westminster which can only have negative consequences on equality in society given that it's been one cùnt after another pandering to these UKIP type arseholes. 

[HTG]

4 hours ago, Juanhourjoe said:

That compass test everyone's done is a little basic, and as someone said earlier, too skewed to the American market.

Did this one below a while back. And instead of being a dot on a grid, I've come out as a market socialist.

https://prismquiz.github.io/

 

I tried this and find it broadly accurate. Progressive social democrat and internationalist.

[HTG]

1 hour ago, Thorongil said:

So why no warning?

None needed. The poster was a spamming arsehole. The Kincardine has been here for years even though his views are reprehensible. But he doesn't spam the whole board - or at least this forum. 

[ICTJohnboy]

13 hours ago, Thorongil said:

Haven’t read all of his posts so wasn’t aware.

 

Maybe you should try reading all his posts - especially those where he attempts to defend the likes of Arlene Foster and her association with the Orange Order.

 

 

Edited January 4, 2022 by ICTJohnboy

[Thorongil]

29 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

It’s shocking! You should resign P&B in protest.

Not keen to engage with the question, are you dear?

[Thorongil]

27 minutes ago, HTG said:

That may be the case - I'll take your word for it although I'd prefer the word "significantly" to be defined.  But both need to be examined within the prism of UK govt given the influence UK policy has on devolved administrations.

Salmond was governing through the period where there was a Labour govt between 2007 and 2010 followed by a coalition which helped keep in check the worst excesses of the Tories. 

Sturgeon has mostly had to manage a relentless shift to the right at Westminster which can only have negative consequences on equality in society given that it's been one cùnt after another pandering to these UKIP type arseholes. 

Under Salmond’s Government, which had less to spend than Sturgeon’s and no borrowing powers, poverty as defined in reporting reduced to 15% from 21%. 

Since Sturgeon took over it has steadily risen back to 21%. 

[Thorongil]

29 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

Maybe you should try reading all his posts - especially those where he attempts to defend the likes of Arlene Foster and her association with the Orange Order.

 

 

Surely people are entitled to such views whether one agrees with them of finds them to be complete fallacy, as I do?

Edited January 4, 2022 by Thorongil

[ICTJohnboy]

4 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

Surely people are entitled to such views whether one agrees with them of funds them to be complete fallacy, as I do?

 

Eh?

 

[Thorongil]

Just now, ICTJohnboy said:

 

Eh?

 

Typo corrected

[ICTJohnboy]

14 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

Typo corrected

 

It wasn't the typo I was on about, it was more your use of the word "fallacy"

[Thorongil]

10 minutes ago, ICTJohnboy said:

 

It wasn't the typo I was on about, it was more your use of the word "fallacy"

Don’t think I can help you then John.

[invergowrie arab]

I support a highly regulated marketplace of ideas. 

[BFTD]

If folk could stop quoting this account too, that would be grand. Thanks.

[coprolite]

49 minutes ago, Thorongil said:

Surely people are entitled to such views whether one agrees with them of finds them to be complete fallacy, as I do?

Being entitled to hold such views and being welcome to express them  on a moderated members forum are two different things. 
 

He’s perfectly entitled to have polite discussions about how much of a problem wokery is elsewhere.

For what it’s worth, I think a ban was excessive and think that P&B can be a bit of an echo chamber.