Here’s a useful rule of thumb I learnt many, many years ago. It works. It’s powerful. Always re-read what you’ve written before posting. Then remove all attacking words, blaming words and shaming words. Suddenly, you’ve got a really meaningful piece of writing that’s not clouded by all your emotional stuff. Suddenly, it’s about the subject and not about me, me, me. Suddenly, you’re not projecting your merd on everyone else. Just a thought, to rescue the thread!
2 Likes
No need to rescue the thread mate, he asked for an explanation, I gave it …I’m done.
No intention of prolonging a triviality attatched to the thread.
Can’t speak for him,.as hr always likes the last word…he can have it, I certainly aint fussed about a goat ffs.
Just put it down to a personality clash and a mutual dislike…it goes back to my pub analogy not everyone gets on.
I have read the posts from @oiltreader and @les_sylphides and think they are correct.
Yes I did ask for an explanation about the goat meme.
I still do not see any point to it except as a derogatory comment on another poster.
I do not say it is a very serious and nasty one, but it has only one purpose (that I can see) to demean someone else.
It is awkward to discuss what is and isn’t OK.
How may times is “humour” used as a weapon.
How often are racial or sexist slurs used by bullies, then if objected to the victim is accused of “lack of sense of humour”, and “it is only banter”.
As mentioned earlier this a a form of lack of empathy: the insulter cannot see how someone else can take it as an insult. They cannot put themselves in someone else’s position.
Equally if they feel slighted, they can never see how it might have been meant as a joke. Those who shout “Snowflake” the loudest are often the most sensitive flowers amongst us.
Seems to me that disagreeing with and arguing against, a post is exactly why we are here. It isn’t to all sit around saying “yes I agree with everything you say” is it?
Is disagreement the same as ridicule? No, I think not.
And arguing against a point of view is not the same as insulting/demeaning/ridiculing the poster.
If anyone feels the line has been crossed they should IMHO point it out at the time.
Doubtless some will have differing attitudes about where the line is drawn.
As for the comment that “I always think I’m right”?
I do post things I think to be correct. I do not post things I believe to be wrong.
But, isn’t that the same for everyone?
1 Like
Oh so we ARE prolonging it then? 
And I see he’s gone from playing the victim card to the bullying card…no surprise there, it aint the first time.
So if we are resorting to infantile playground stuff, this should be when I do a flounce, mince off shouting for my Mam…err no.
Maybe seeing as ‘Billy the Kid’ and the goat gag has been blown out of all proportion, we should maybe dignify it with a name…let’s call it ‘Goatgate’ in the spirit of political discussions which is ehere all this crap stemmed from
To get back to my pub analogy, if I was mouthing off and somebody showed me that in the spirit it was intended…humour,…a bleating goat meme, I’d maybe have a laugh and join him for a pint.
On the other hand if I tapped soneone on the shoulder, again him mouthing off about his views on illegal immigrants, and called him a ‘racist’ (as is the ‘go to default’ of ‘your lot’) and a religious bigot’,.I would be expecting to be taking my teeth home from said pub in my pocket…
Which takes us back again to my own forum criteria…Say nothing to anyone I would not say to his face.
Maybe if you took that up. you would discontinue to come across as an easily offenfed snowflake,but with untold false bravado.
That is how this ‘feud’ between us started…as you well know, and how I have reacted since is the only way I know to display my displeasure…on a forum that is.
Maybe you would prefer a sanitised lefty woke non free speech, non offending forum, as your lot has got the country like.
If that prevails let me know, cos it aint the type of forum that I want to be connected with.
So basically get a life…and grow up !
How’s that for ‘offensive’ ?
Sue me.
I hope I haven’t offended anyone on this forum, If anyone feels that I have offended them…then I sincerely apologise.
I know that I have a strange sense of humour that sometimes gets a bit close to the mark.I enjoy a bit of robust banter and craic.
We make allowances for you grumpy. 
Maybe I should turn my quirky SoH on you, I too enjoy a bit of robust pi55taking.
I’ve tried it on RR and Moaster, they haven’t had the good manners to return it. 
2 Likes
The trick is for all players to remain in adult mode. As adults we are capable of separating people’s behaviour from them as actual people. Further to that, we are capable of separating their ideas from them.
So if Poster A comes up with an idea, Poster B can choose to say, ‘I don’t like that idea because…’ (attacking the post - the idea) instead of saying ‘I object to the supercilious, condescending way you presented your idea’ (attacking Poster A’s behaviour). And he can certainly choose to avoid saying, ‘You’re an absolute ■■■■ and I don’t agree with anything you say,’ (attacking the actual person himself, as opposed to his behaviour or his idea).
If you are not interested in Poster A’s idea, but want to criticise his behaviour, you may well be on the wrong forum. Better to fight it out on FB, I would have thought.
Careful now, us Yorkshiremen can be a bit ‘temperamental’.
Forums are to discuss things. If you don’t want to continue you don’t have to.
One poster saying they are stopping is not in my view any sort of instruction or order for everyone else to follow their lead!
That is a comment on the post. I refrain from speculating about the character of anyone posting such.
Well there we are again. That is not commenting on the validity of an argument or a point of view.
That is a comment on your opinion of someone else. Attacking the fact that someone dares to have a different opinion, calling it “bleating” or “mouthing off”. If there is an argument against what is said, use it, do not just name call.
I have called you “racist” in the past. I did that because you told us that you treat people of different nationalities differently.
That seems to me to be perfectly rational.
I have not called you, nor anyone else, “racist” because they have concerns about immigration.
I find that hard to agree with.
Aren’t our characters made up of our actions and beliefs?
Someone who kicks kittens, and thinks the world should bow down before them are not very nice characters.
I guess though that we can say “Stop kickiing kittens”, and “no I won’t do as you want” rather than you’re a ****!
An example of what I meant by that is:
a good teacher, when confronted with anti-social behaviour, will endeavour to separate the child from his behaviour - especially with younger children whose rational thinking skills are just developing. This means that whilst very firmly making it clear that his behaviour is totally unacceptable, he isn’t made to feel that he is inherently a crap person. This serves to maintain his self-esteem as a person with whom you can then help to build better behaviour patterns. If you’ve destroyed his self-esteem, you’ve got nothing to work on because in general the poorer the self-esteem the more destructive the behaviour. This isn’t airy-fairy phycho-educational hot air: I’ve been teaching for well over 50 years and I can vouch for the efficacy of separating the behaviour from the person.
OK. I do fully accept that in a teaching environment, that is the correct way to behave.
But…
Does the teacher not encounter an adult with bad behaviour and think to themselves “What a ****!”
And in your teaching do you not encounter those who take correction in factual matters as a personal affront?
Yep, I know good technique might involve never saying “You are wrong” to a young kid, but rather say, “I don’t think that is quite right. Did you think of etc etc”
In more grownup circles when an idea is wrong it can and should be challenged, without the person being challenged taking the hump.
Some adults take questioning of their ideas as a challenge to themselves, and talk of, or might actually use physical violence.
Ah but you’re an Aussie, and as we know Aussies are incredibly laid back and difficult to offend. So in that spirit I’m waiting for something incredibly offensive to hit back with!
1 Like
Years ago, on another forum, a Pom was amazed at how Aussies can accept a pi55take and even put themselves down. I replied that, personally, I don’t take myself more seriouriously than others take me. I stand by that comment to this day. If you can get a laugh at my expense, as long as it’s not vindictive, I’m fine with that.
Pretty much the only thing that winds me up is bs artists who think I’m stupid enough to believe their fantasies, theyre fools.
2 Likes
Ideally yes. But what you think is a wrong idea may only be ‘wrong’ by what they perceive to be your ideology. Yes, we should fearlessly challenge people’s ideas. But if they take umbrage, we have a number of choices: walk away; or lay ground-rules about what you’re prepared to accept if the conversation is to continue; or tell / teach them how to behave. That last one is the most likely to turn them into psychos.
So, if they do accept some basic rules then the only choice is to walk away. To leave them voicing their point of view, without challenge.
In this www age we do have many echo chambers out there, and I would hate to see more of them.
I do not take great offence at most things said to me here.
If someone is chucking a witty jib along with an argument, whether I agree or not, is one thing. Putting up posts criticising posters as “bleating” etc without giving any reason at all, is not the same, it is not banter. It is pantomime “Oh yes it is!” “Oh no it isn’t!”
If a poster thinks some one is complaining without reason, fine call it “bleating” if you want, but explain why. Say why the bleating is unjustified.
Whilst I agree with most of what you’re saying, I would reiterate that walking away isn’t just an echo-chamber exercise, it is a very powerful way of saying, ‘Actually, I don’t accept your rules of engagement, I don’t accept your behaviour and I don’t agree with what you are saying.’ It is complete safe to walk round things that don’t suit us in our short lives on earth, especially if we cannot change them. We have choices.
I can change some things. I cannot change others.
In this context I can challenge another person’s opinion whilst knowing that I will not change their mind, but forums are not one-to-one situations. As you and I exchange views here I daresay others are also reading and thinking about what we say (or maybe we are alone ). So, I write my view, for more than just one person.
I do not want the person I disagree with to have the floor to themselves. For any wider audience there should be two sides presented.
It should not be for people who disobey “rules of engagement” to have the floor to themselves unchallenged.
The OPs well intended thread was an attempt to calm things a bit (personal attacks) sadly it’s not working. In real life you can get rid of an irritation , the pedant strikes again.
After reading Franglais replies my opinion is fully vindicated I reckon.
Patronising, condescending with the sting in the tail…exaggerated bravado, with not the slightest chance of behaving the same say in real life…
Put it this way in plain English mate, I’d lurrrve to see you try and repratedly chuck what I have already told you I consider gross insults at me in REAL life.
Anyhoo…you just keep on carry on.doing it behind the safety of your keyboard mate, …it is what we expect of you.
Classic symptoms of ‘Little Man Syndrome’.
Not so much a personal attack more an accurate observation.
To use your own expression 'That seems to be completely rational.
Funny that apart from the odd spat and exchange, I have no real problem with anyone else on here .