Jump to content

P J

Members
  • Content Count

    6,990
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    89

Posts posted by P J


  1. 7 hours ago, asperity said:

    And, as I've said before, why are the PTB so keen to shut him up? Are they embarrassed by him showing up their ineptitude in dealing with the child abuse gangs that are only now being brought to justice?

    The very man whose side you are taking could easily have caused the trial of child abusers to collapse with his actions which were taken to try to further his political career and merely an attention seeking stunt.  The PTB  weren’t trying to shut him up, the law of the land is there for good reason so locking him up was the correct action.  One less scumbsg on the streets for a while.


  2. You can get sensational tomato sausages on thick cut farmhouse toast smothered in butter from Baker J’s cafe in the new market and I have to say they are not only amazing, they have also defeated me on a couple of occasions.  Great value too,  give them a try,  you know you want to


  3. 23 minutes ago, asperity said:

    Someone seems to be downvoting any comment that doesn't support the hive mentality, I wonder who that might be? 🤔

     

    Yeah, not like anyone could possibly dislike anything you gob out on here ,  ooooh the arrogance .

    Pmsl  🤣🤣🤣

     

     

    • Downvote 1

  4. I attended this years Mela, as I have since its inception and it just goes from strength to strength.  So wonderful and uplifting to see the people of the town come together in celebration , from all the diverse cultures our town boasts.  The food was absolutely superb and the acts and entertainers did a great job.  A beautiful day that flew in the face of the recent rise in hate crimes within the town and in the country.  

    Love and hope beats hate every time.

    https://www.warrington-worldwide.co.uk/2019/07/09/warrington-mela-celebrates-cultural-harmony/

    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 1

  5. All these excuses for a vile self serving thug and serial criminal whose actions whilst craving self promotion could have led to the acquittal of some disgusting sex offenders.  No excuses, no if’s or buts bang him up as he deserves and for as long as the law of the land allows.

    • Downvote 1

  6. The Scouts walked, alongside round 2000 other walkers.  The tradition continues although nowadays it is not the highlight of the summer for many.  People still gave money to walkers and there were still marching bands.  Long may it continue, in spite of negative comments from across the pond where I suppose size is everything.

     

    14y0942.jpg

     

    2ltgjk6.jpg

     

    nd7i8z.jpg

     

    2ahi1av.jpg

     

    f9ghev.jpg

     

    11tpmok.jpg

     

    r7193b.jpg

    • Upvote 2

  7. 1 hour ago, Confused52 said:

    Once again you twist and turn, the question from you was:

     

    hurtful  

    adjective

    • Causing distress to someone's feelings.

      ‘his hurtful remarks’
       
       
      So once again you subtly changed the meaning to make it seem that you were correct. You were being deliberately offensive with the question and your attempt at refutation was flawed. Your question was about feelings whilst the policy is about actual harm, although of a social kind.
       
      You have clearly at last read the actual guidance in an attempt to respond to my point. In response to your proper question, no I wouldn't miss any of those things in the guidance but I have heard many discussions on the radio about old adverts claiming they would have fallen foul of this policy. On the Media show a person from the ASA in fact said that they would be a problem. One of them was the Karl Howman Flash advert. It was interesting that the young commentators interpreted the adverts completely differently from our family, we had seen them in passing at the time. Their interpretation was distorted to fit their own point of view. So while I don't thing I would miss those paradigms in the guidance nor do I see a justification to ban them. In essence there is not sufficient evidence of harm to justify the reduction in the means of expression available to the producers of adverts. That is why I see this as an unnecessary reduction in free speech. In controlling the breath of images and word available to express the ideas of ads this is an instance of the philosophy behind PC. Hence it is, in effect, a PC ban.
       
      You will realise, I hope, that I am not agreeing with Obs deliberately or disagreeing with you deliberately - I am just adding my opinion to a discussion. The continuing use of insults detracts from the discussion and very often derails it completely.
       
      The parting question for you to answer is do you agree with freedom of speech, within the law, on this and other social media?

    Yawn,  now there is an exercise in boring pedantry ad nauseam if ever there was one,  what a dry and crusty read.

    as this ruling is not able to travel back in time the point of old adverts falling foul of it is completely irrelevant and frankly stupid.

    this is not an attack on free speech , rather a kick in the pants for lazy ad agencies.

    as you say it has no effect on your life and I doubt it will alter the quality of life of anyone in a negative way so just more hot air from the usual suspects.

     

    • Downvote 1

  8. 20 minutes ago, Evil Sid said:

    double posted for some odd reason.

     

    The schoolboy was apparently removed from the lesson for being disruptive.  Seems he had pre-planned it and had it videoed. Still, it gave the swivel eyed loons some red meat to chew on. Oh! and it still has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue at hand.


  9. 10 hours ago, Confused52 said:

    As usual a diversion tactic. I am against PC and over-regulation. You question is constructed to be offensive, I am not convinced that I agree that the examples in the ASA regulatory guidance are actually likely to cause harm. The policy is not about hurt - it is about harm, changing the word to hurt in your question is just part of the diversion tactic. What was your  view of the examples when you read it? You have read it to express such firm views I hope.

    [Advertisements] must not include gender stereotypes that are likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offence.

    Now who can get themselves in a lather about this?  Are any of the adverts which are mentioned as examles something anyone will miss (yes I did read the ASA ruling).  Nothing in the ASA ruling either affects or offends or bothers me.  Why should it? and why should anyone be bothered at all by it?  Which of the given examples of unsuitable adverts will you miss the most?

    Oh! and for the record , hardly a diversion at all, in fact it is barely a meander.

    harm

    verb [ T ]
     UK  /hɑːm/ US  /hɑːrm/

    B2 to hurt someone or damage something:


  10. 10 hours ago, Confused52 said:

    As usual a diversion tactic. I am against PC and over-regulation. You question is constructed to be offensive, I am not convinced that I agree that the examples in the ASA regulatory guidance are actually likely to cause harm. The policy is not about hurt - it is about harm, changing the word to hurt in your question is just part of the diversion tactic. What was your  view of the examples when you read it? You have read it to express such firm views I hope.

    it was your buddy Observer who changed it to hurtful in the opening post of the topic,  well he actually spelled it hurtfull at least twice but there we go.  You did read the opening post before expressing such firm views didn't you?


  11. 10 minutes ago, Confused52 said:

    Note I said attempts so I did not overestimate your effect as you suggest however you consistently try to stop people having opinions that you don't agree with. That is what PC is about: controlling the language in order to control the ideas that can be considered, you do it all of the time.

    No I contest opinions which run contrary to mine, isn’t that what this place is about or are you wanting an echo chamber?  Over the years all who had views contrary to the common poster on here have been bullied and forced off.  I’m not easily bullied and am going nowhere.  Controlling the debate?????  Let’s see who posts all the topics.


  12. 20 minutes ago, Confused52 said:

    I find your attempts at censorship rather confirms Observer's disquiet at the extension of PC philosophy which this ban, which has yet to affect any ad at all, represents. It is a clear and distressing reduction in our liberties in an area which is beyond what I believe should be the remit of the ASA, namely social engineering. Free speech is being eroded by policies such as this as well as commenters who divert any expression of an opinion by constructing personal attacks on those who express them; in Obs' case usually hoping to start a discussion. He doesn't want you to agree, he wants you to discuss - it is what this place is for.

    What utter crap.  But I’m sure observer is delighted to have you speak for him,  how bloody arrogant can one poster get?  You clearly overestimate my power on this forum,  I am totally unable to censor any post, sadly lol  tell me,  how has this action affected your life?  Let me guess, not one jot.  But who  you will,  mainly out of a crusade to have a go at me and nothing to do with the topic, ,  possibly due to previous ridiculing of you by myself.  Jog on Mr Whippy

×
×
  • Create New...