Random Irritations

[Captainron]

• Trolling/Flaming - 3 Points, Expires 45 days
  Deliberately picking fights with other members or starting threads/making posts with the intention of causing unrest or ill-feeling.

Having a different opinion isn’t this though Bob. We are all entitled to our opinion and we can share it on here. Whether I or you like it or not is up for discussion.

 

[fundy]

Interesting question. I have a no pets policy at my holiday home. Don't want the beds and sofas getting trashed or that 'wet dog' smell everywhere. Quite happy to accept that I'll lose some bookings but it keeps the place in good order.

Holiday home for short term rentals and a house to rent for 6-12 mths totally different kettle of fish

I have no issue with people who dont want pets in their property, but posted as it is my current irritation that its making it almost impossible to find a home to live in

 

[Deleted member 16999]

• Trolling/Flaming - 3 Points, Expires 45 days
  Deliberately picking fights with other members or starting threads/making posts with the intention of causing unrest or ill-feeling.

I won’t respond to his posts as I disagree with 99% of what he says, it doesn’t make him wrong though, if that’s his genuine opinion then he aint trolling.
His timing and the thread he posted the comment on is sick imo, but then that’s my opinion and doesn’t make me right.

 

[Imurg]

Lots of things in a similar vein. There are MOBO awards but not MOWO ones.

Doesn't everything come from the Blues..?

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Holiday home for short term rentals and a house to rent for 6-12 mths totally different kettle of fish

I have no issue with people who dont want pets in their property, but posted as it is my current irritation that its making it almost impossible to find a home to live in

Sorry didn't see that far back in the thread, just responding to CF's post ?

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Doesn't everything come from the Blues..?

Nah, the blues originated around 1860. There are loads of genres of music that can be traced back long before that.

 

[harpo_72]

I won’t respond to his posts as I disagree with 99% of what he says, it doesn’t make him wrong though, if that’s his genuine opinion then he aint trolling.
His timing and the thread he posted the comment on is sick imo, but then that’s my opinion and doesn’t make me right.

I am confused now perhaps I was thinking of the wrong poster and their contribution has been deleted before I saw it

 

[Deleted member 16999]

I am confused now perhaps I was thinking of the wrong poster and their contribution has been deleted before I saw it

We/They are talking about Kellfire. Post#20 on the RIP, Captain Tom thread.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

The fact that there are a "Gay Games" - I am all for promoting equality and removing past injustices but is there a "Straight Games"? Goes down the same road as the Black Police Federation. Sorry but this kind of thing has done my head in for years.

Do you really not see the reasons why people have created these games or awards ?

Surely people can now understand that it’s still not equal by any stretch of the imagination and that there is still huge levels or prejudice towards many areas of mankind

 

[Pathetic Shark]

So a group in society has a justified case for being singled out …. and then create their own event specifically for themselves and exclude others. Nope I don't see the reasons at all.
And the truly cynical warped part of my mind wonders how they confirm eligibility for said event ....

 

[Deleted member 15344]

So a group in society has a justified case for being singled out …. and then create their own event specifically for themselves and exclude others. Nope I don't see the reasons at all.
And the truly cynical warped part of my mind wonders how they confirm eligibility for said event ....

I would say your first action would be to do a bit of research ?‍

https://gaygames.org/FAQs

If you’re going to have Gay Games, why can't there be “straight games?”

In practice, most sports events are already “straight games”, where the assumption is made that all participants are straight, and where homosexuals must hide their sexual identity.

But the Gay Games are themselves “straight games.” Everyone is welcome, whatever their sexual orientation. It is estimated that about 10% of participants in each edition of the Gay Games are straight, often friends and family members of LGBT+ participants who participate to show their support and solidarity

 

[Whereditgo]

i don't believe the majority of people believe that anyone "must hide their sexual identity" any longer.

What I do find strange with minority groups is the notion that while wanting (rightfully) to be treated equally, the said group then set themselves apart.

 

[SwingsitlikeHogan]

It is - But never mind - a jaunty little ditty

 

[USER1999]

I don't have an issue with the gay games. They can do what they want.
I used to go to the medical games, which were for people in the doctors/nurses/dentist type industry. Ssme difference really.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

i don't believe the majority of people believe that anyone "must hide their sexual identity" any longer.

What I do find strange with minority groups is the notion that while wanting (rightfully) to be treated equally, the said group then set themselves apart.

If you think people don’t believe they must hide their sexuality then ask yourself how many gay currently playing

Footballers
Rugby players
Golfers
Athletes
American Football players
Boxers

In fact 99% of the sports

The stigma is still there and that’s why people still hide until they retire

 

[Blue in Munich]

I think that's a little North Korea no? if that's his opinion, then that's up to him (If that genuinely is his opinion, then I feel for him), We don't have to agree to it, but to silence him as people found it offensive? I would say it was in very bad taste and lacked tact etc etc.

Just asking for someone to get banned as their opinion is not the same as everyone else's, is a little orwellian..

However, Marc can be controversial just for the sake of it.. Not unlike many others here... So a ban for inciting arguments/trolling? maybe, I am not up to speed on the forum rules. This is probably my most controversial post ever!

I'm fully aware that he's controversial which is why I've had him on ignore. Unfortunately two comments on another thread this morning made absolutely no sense this morning until I checked the ignored content.

The holiday referred to that Captain Sir Tom Moore took was apparently allowed and was not paid for out of public funds from this country; he was invited by the Barbados Tourist Board as a guest & flown there by BA is my understanding. I'm not aware that he broke any rules in going, but happy to be corrected on any of these points if someone knows better. To suggest it was about as low a blow as you could deliver, and it was, in my opinion, particularly distasteful since the man had just passed and it view of what he had recently achieved.

It crossed a line for me to the extent that I considered it ban-worthy and expressed that opinion. Orwellian; North Korean? Yeah, maybe if that's what you think, fine, as you say you're entitled to your opinion. Mine was that this was that far beyond the pale that it merited a period of reflection and I expressed. We'll agree to differ.

 

[Blue in Munich]

We all have opinions which might be a touch unpopular. I have posted loads on here where I think one way and someone else thinks a different way. Grounds for debate really and removing the post and the poster because you disagree isn’t the way to go.

Use the ignore function if you have to

I did use the ignore function, unfortunately I had to look at it to make sense of other posters comments. I've got no issue with stuff that's a touch unpopular or differing opinions, or debating them; I have an issue with what appears to be a factually incorrect statement besmirching the reputation of someone recently deceased who in my opinion deserved a lot better than that.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Well said, people should use the report button themselves rather than bitching or abusing other posters (which is against forum rules) on here.

Had it still been there to report, trust me I would have done it but it appeared to have been removed, albeit still visible as it had been quoted. No maybe I shouldn't have bitched, but as I've said, that one crossed a line and despite best efforts by using the ignore function, on this occasion I bit.

 

[Captainron]

I'm fully aware that he's controversial which is why I've had him on ignore. Unfortunately two comments on another thread this morning made absolutely no sense this morning until I checked the ignored content.

The holiday referred to that Captain Sir Tom Moore took was apparently allowed and was not paid for out of public funds from this country; he was invited by the Barbados Tourist Board as a guest & flown there by BA is my understanding. I'm not aware that he broke any rules in going, but happy to be corrected on any of these points if someone knows better. To suggest it was about as low a blow as you could deliver, and it was, in my opinion, particularly distasteful since the man had just passed and it view of what he had recently achieved.

It crossed a line for me to the extent that I considered it ban-worthy and expressed that opinion. Orwellian; North Korean? Yeah, maybe if that's what you think, fine, as you say you're entitled to your opinion. Mine was that this was that far beyond the pale that it merited a period of reflection and I expressed. We'll agree to differ.

Levels of offense is where it gets blurry as hell.

Personally, I wasn't that bothered about his post. I even commented on a different thread that he has at least had a holiday with his family before he passed on. You feel very differently about it we see but it's not banworthy in my eyes.

No one has taken offense at your signature or gone on for a ban on the inference that an act of terror on parliament is the way forward.

 

[Blue in Munich]

Levels of offense is where it gets blurry as hell.

Personally, I wasn't that bothered about his post. I even commented on a different thread that he has at least had a holiday with his family before he passed on. You feel very differently about it we see but it's not banworthy in my eyes.

No one has taken offense at your signature or gone on for a ban on the inference that an act of terror on parliament is the way forward.

It's not an inference that an act of terror is the way forward; it's an opinion on the morals of the house & its occupants.