Ronnie fookin Bickering Thread

[lardy]

I've already stated on several occasions I was referring to the phoneme X being replaced by Z when it's the initial sound of a word. It's no more complicated than that.

I'm off to watch Primer, as I fancy interacting with something that challenges me intellectually, something you've never been good at

Old feedback used to understand that movie. He'd never call it a challenge.

God I miss him

 

[kiffa]

You're so focused on being right that you're not actually reading what is being written.

Why do you think Guiliani is an expert on Pinyin ?

 

[Feedback]

Old feedback used to understand that movie. He'd never call it a challenge.

God I miss him

It's not a particularly difficult film to follow, the challenge these days is managing to stay awake all the way through it.

 

[Worse]

I agree.
He has a right to that opinion, and clearly that opinion does not have the capacity to directly cause physical harm to others.

Thank you for highlighting this as the perfect example of what I was patiently trying to explain to you the other day. I'm delighted that I seem to have finally gotten through and that you now agree with me.

His words had an impact, and he has been held accountable for those words.

Hold up there stranger, get off your horse and let's chew this over.

"His words had impact." So what? My only interest would be protecting a brand and a brand image, which had been carefully crafted and marketed over many years, at a huge amount of sunk costs.
I could monetise notionally the damage to the company's image and its position versus competition, in the market.

Now outside of that, as a private individual I would defend his right to free speech, even if it offends some people. People have a right to offend others, as they have a right to be offended. Being offensive however is a completely different kettle of fish.

 

[Dr Lecter]

Hold up there stranger, get off your horse and let's chew this over.

"His words had impact." So what? My only interest would be protecting a brand and a brand image, which had been carefully crafted and marketed over many years, at a huge amount of sunk costs.
I could monetise notionally the damage to the company's image and its position versus competition, in the market.

Now outside of that, as a private individual I would defend his right to free speech, even if it offends some people. People have a right to offend others, as they have a right to be offended. Being offensive however is a completely different kettle of fish.

You really need to get laid.

 

[TH63]

Hold up there stranger, get off your horse and let's chew this over.

"His words had impact." So what? My only interest would be protecting a brand and a brand image, which had been carefully crafted and marketed over many years, at a huge amount of sunk costs.
I could monetise notionally the damage to the company's image and its position versus competition, in the market.

Now outside of that, as a private individual I would defend his right to free speech, even if it offends some people. People have a right to offend others, as they have a right to be offended. Being offensive however is a completely different kettle of fish.

Thank you for once again agreeing with me and helping to prove my point.

He had the absolute right to those opinions, and he had the absolute right to vocalise them. But as I keep saying, one has to take responsibility for those words, and he did.

Do I I deny his right to have and to voice his opinion? No
Were those words illegal? Possibly contravenes the Welsh Language act, but even if they did, I doubt that's a criminal offence - I defer to those who know more about it
Was I offended by it? Little bit
Does that matter? Not really.

 

[Vincent tan]

Need half a pint of phlegm in your throat to say hello in Welsh!!

 

[Jimmytaff]

Thank you for once again agreeing with me and helping to prove my point.

He had the absolute right to those opinions, and he had the absolute right to vocalise them. But as I keep saying, one has to take responsibility for those words, and he did.

Do I I deny his right to have and to voice his opinion? No
Were those words illegal? Possibly contravenes the Welsh Language act, but even if they did, I doubt that's a criminal offence - I defer to those who know more about it
Was I offended by it? Little bit
Does that matter? Not really.

I'd be very surprised if any thing he said contravenes the Welsh Language Act. Its just boorish, lazy and cliched. He's probably the type who believes people only started speaking Welsh when he entered the pub or shop just to spite him

 

[Jimmytaff]

Need half a pint of phlegm in your throat to say hello in Welsh!!

What? Helo

 

[Alf Garnetts Pipe]

You really need to get laid.

He’s very wordy for a taxi driver

 

[stantys tattoos]

If you two are going to go at it again on this thread, it's going to end up in the bickering thread

only this thread???

 

[Worse]

I would argue that getting sacked is a consequence.

You don't work in the private sector, do you?
Gerald Ratner described his products as crap, some years ago. It destroyed his company forever. It wasn't that he said anything that people didn't already know. He abdicated his fiduciary duty and the resultant media backlash ended up closing the business down.

 

[QM Redux]

Produce the blog Reflux. You can't can you.
Lasha Darkmoon has written on geo-politics for years.
Over the last thirty years or so I've probably read hundreds and hundreds of different blogs on all kinds of topics.

Consequences, Splotty, consequences.

 

[QM Redux]

You don't work in the private sector, do you?
Gerald Ratner described his products as crap, some years ago. It destroyed his company forever. It wasn't that he said anything that people didn't already know. He abdicated his fiduciary duty and the resultant media backlash ended up closing the business down.

That doesn't sound very socialist.

 

[Worse]

I produced your promotion of a blog written by someone else; let me guess, you fundamentally disagreed with it yet posted it without comment, just to provoke discussion?

Why are you yet again trying to derail an entire thread. When will this childish behaviour of yours cease?

 

[Worse]

I would argue that getting sacked is a consequence.

I'll wait until the idiot has moved on to other threads.

 

[QM Redux]

Why are you yet again trying to derail an entire thread. When will this childish behaviour of yours cease?

Rattled, bubbelah, rattled.

 

[QM Redux]

I'll wait until the idiot has moved on to other threads.

If that means you'll not post if I post in a thread... I don't think many people will see that as a threat tbh. Probably would leas to mass celebrations.

 

[TH63]

You don't work in the private sector, do you?
Gerald Ratner described his products as crap, some years ago. It destroyed his company forever. It wasn't that he said anything that people didn't already know. He abdicated his fiduciary duty and the resultant media backlash ended up closing the business down.

That's a ridiculous analogy. He owned the company, it was a business decision, but another example of someone having the right to free speech but then living with the consequences of voicing it.

That's all I've been trying to say - there is freedom to say what you want provided you are prepared to live with the consequences.

 

[QM Redux]

That's a ridiculous analogy. He owned the company, it was a business decision, but another example of someone having the right to free speech but then living with the consequences of voicing it.

That's all I've been trying to say - there is freedom to say what you want provided you are prepared to live with the consequences.

EXACTLY!

People shout "freedom of speech" whilst not wanting to take responsibility for the consequences.

Ratner's comment caused consequences for the company not because of the description of the produce but because by implication, it mocked those shopping there. Consequence? Pissed off customers shop elsewhere.

It's really not difficult to understand.

EDIT: It's still amusing to see such a committed "Socialist" go against his "principles" of freedom of speech to "protect the brand".