Off Topic The Environment

andytoprankin said:
Never been good at following rules, Toby. ;)
Click to expand...
I would hazard a guess you have never been good at understanding. But what do I expect - two members of the clique backing each other up. You must be so happy you have stopped even SH from posting now. As always with you guys - post on the person not the subject.
Just to try to educate you - I am a humble poster and create no rules.
 
King Arthur said:
I would hazard a guess you have never been good at understanding. But what do I expect - two members of the clique backing each other up. You must be so happy you have stopped even SH from posting now. As always with you guys - post on the person not the subject.
Just to try to educate you - I am a humble poster and create no rules.
Click to expand...
Nobody has stopped SH. from posting Arturo. In the course of his time on our forum he had managed to insult, or try to belittle, most of us at some time, and that was right across the political spectrum. I have no problem with posters having different opinions but he was a specialist in winding up anyone who didn't agree with him 100%. The forum is not so desparate for numbers that we have to tolerate this. As far as bringing in external material is concerned, I think everyone can judge for themselves. If posters do nothing other than this, and express no personal debate whatsoever then it can be irritating, but otherwise I have no problem with it. I don't do it personally for reasons of my ineptitude at most things to do with the internet, and so have to rely totally on my long drawn out texts (mostly without paragraphs). <laugh>
 
King Arthur said:
I would hazard a guess you have never been good at understanding. But what do I expect - two members of the clique backing each other up. You must be so happy you have stopped even SH from posting now. As always with you guys - post on the person not the subject.
Just to try to educate you - I am a humble poster and create no rules.
Click to expand...
:emoticon-0136-giggl
King Arthur said:
I would hazard a guess you have never been good at understanding. But what do I expect - two members of the clique backing each other up. You must be so happy you have stopped even SH from posting now. As always with you guys - post on the person not the subject.
Just to try to educate you - I am a humble poster and create no rules.
Click to expand...
BB? <doh>
King Arthur said:
I would hazard a guess you have never been good at understanding. But what do I expect - two members of the clique backing each other up. You must be so happy you have stopped even SH from posting now. As always with you guys - post on the person not the subject.
Just to try to educate you - I am a humble poster and create no rules.
Click to expand...
Start with yourself, Leo, you have a lot of catching up to do.
 
colognehornet said:
Nobody has stopped SH. from posting Arturo. In the course of his time on our forum he had managed to insult, or try to belittle, most of us at some time, and that was right across the political spectrum. I have no problem with posters having different opinions but he was a specialist in winding up anyone who didn't agree with him 100%. The forum is not so desparate for numbers that we have to tolerate this. As far as bringing in external material is concerned, I think everyone can judge for themselves. If posters do nothing other than this, and express no personal debate whatsoever then it can be irritating, but otherwise I have no problem with it. I don't do it personally for reasons of my ineptitude at most things to do with the internet, and so have to rely totally on my long drawn out texts (mostly without paragraphs). <laugh>
Click to expand...
No - ill advised words - when we post in a hurry we do not always weigh each word. He has not been "stopped" from posting. Several people have suggested he "went away" but not always as politely as that.
I agree SH has not always been the most mellow of posters and cannot deny he and I have not always seen eye to eye. However would you not concede that there are about half a dozen people on here who pick on his every post and attack it? As someone who also has felt there are a few posters - you are one - who dislike me I know how sapping it can be to be forever having to defend against constant criticism. SH does not argue. He posts observations - mostly unsupported - and does not respond to what often amount to demands that he provides evidence. The cheap "Daily Mail" jibe is often levelled at him too. There are a few of you who never criticise anything each other post. Now maybe that is because you are in complete alignment but if it looks like you are a clique - and several people have observed that then can you be surprised?
I agree about external material. Each to their own. As I have no authority though I can only express my opinions - which I do. Is that allowable?
 
King Arthur said:
No - ill advised words - when we post in a hurry we do not always weigh each word. He has not been "stopped" from posting. Several people have suggested he "went away" but not always as politely as that.
I agree SH has not always been the most mellow of posters and cannot deny he and I have not always seen eye to eye. However would you not concede that there are about half a dozen people on here who pick on his every post and attack it? As someone who also has felt there are a few posters - you are one - who dislike me I know how sapping it can be to be forever having to defend against constant criticism. SH does not argue. He posts observations - mostly unsupported - and does not respond to what often amount to demands that he provides evidence. The cheap "Daily Mail" jibe is often levelled at him too. There are a few of you who never criticise anything each other post. Now maybe that is because you are in complete alignment but if it looks like you are a clique - and several people have observed that then can you be surprised?
I agree about external material. Each to their own. As I have no authority though I can only express my opinions - which I do. Is that allowable?
Click to expand...
Where do you get the impression that I don't like you ? If that were the case I wouldn't spend time answering your posts.
As for there being a clique on here, I really don't know - maybe there is, but I think this exists on more or less every forum - we have all been on here for a long time. But from my position it's not a left wing clique. In order to attract, and keep, posters we need a wide range of threads - maybe we have too many political ones. 'Trumpers', the environment, politics, Brexit etc. Most forums only have one political thread. Maybe if we have a separate 'debating' thread - with a different topic each week, it would throw up different constellations and different alliances.
 
andytoprankin said:
:emoticon-0136-giggl

BB? <doh>

Start with yourself, Leo, you have a lot of catching up to do.
Click to expand...
Again - you like to analyse my every word. Start with YOURSELF.
By "humble poster" I was suggesting commonplace - I claim no authority - I am not a mod and was responding to an accusation that implied I make rules. Clear enough?
I have dealt with the SH bit. The post from Toby was an attack on me. I replied - so would you have. I do not start personal arguments but I will not allow others to attack me. When I post I try to talk about subjects. Of course in a heated debate we will sometimes criticise a persons views - even call the views stupid although I try not to - and think I generally manage that. I certainly try never to be personally abusive. For the past couple of weeks I have engaged massively in a friendly but combative manner .with a few others. Then along comes Toby - on different thread - and abuses me for no reason whatsoever. I ignore him as much as I can because he and I - like you and I - do not get on. But he chooses to have a snide go at me. Do you deny that?
Your response to Toby was in tacit agreement with his post. You did not try to suggest that he was wrong about me. You went along with him. My post to you used a form of sarcasm - no more than that as you clearly did not show you knew I have no power to create rules.
Even this post by you was unnecessary. You did not step back and consider whether I had been insulted. No of course not because as I said the clique never criticise each other.
I have NO catching up to do. As I say, I post honestly and do not seek conflict. Without putting others on ignore I generally ignore the posts of people I expect to attack me - as I do for you and Toby - and BB (Bolton's Boots). Is that not sensible. You dislike me fine so why not ignore me too rather than "innocently" comply with snide and cowardly hit and run attacks.
 
colognehornet said:
Where do you get the impression that I don't like you ? If that were the case I wouldn't spend time answering your posts.
As for there being a clique on here, I really don't know - maybe there is, but I think this exists on more or less every forum - we have all been on here for a long time. But from my position it's not a left wing clique. In order to attract, and keep, posters we need a wide range of threads - maybe we have too many political ones. 'Trumpers', the environment, politics, Brexit etc. Most forums only have one political thread. Maybe if we have a separate 'debating' thread - with a different topic each week, it would throw up different constellations and different alliances.
Click to expand...
Sorry - I misread who the post was from. In my hurry I thought it was a follow up from earlier. The people I know dislike me are Andy, Bolton and Toby for sure and one or two others I guess but will not name. You are certainly someone who I do not include in that group.
There certainly is a clique - not official and not organised but a group who "move together" In concerted fashion attack the same people and hold very similar anti Tory ( not necessarily left wing views).
I thnk you are wrong. By having a number of threads on different subjects you hope people will visit those they feel they can contribute to. Who is to say which thread is worthwhile or not. Let redundant threads die. You and I are poles apart on almost everything. Yet over the last two weeks we have had a very interesting and engaging debate without a hint of nastiness. The "clean" nature of hte debate even drew in a couple of others.

There is very little talk on here about football. More than half the people who do the football predictions do not ever post on any thread. A very few post on the football threads.
Most of my time nowadays is spent on another board. On that there are literally dozens of active threads on every subject imaginable - and very many on politics. There are dozens of posters and views range from ones that make you look positively right wing to ones that make Jacob Rees Mogg look like a communist.
I gve myself a year off from this board. I looked in occasionally to see if it had improved but it had not. In the end I decided to come back and to change my name from Leo so that it was clear that any views I now give are those of Arthur not Leonard. That way I hoped previous enemies might "start again" But Toby has shown that isnot to be the case. I will not be driven off this board again though.
I hope Wear Yellow and SH also return to give a little stick back to those who dish it out. At the moment it is the case that I fight my corner alone - much more easy for the clique to circle and attack.
 
Last edited:
Funny though how easy it is for a thread to be hijacked.
A perfectly innocent and interesting post on the arctic has been used to create a page of argument. And we wonder why more people avoid the board.
 
King Arthur said:
Funny though how easy it is for a thread to be hijacked.
A perfectly innocent and interesting post on the arctic has been used to create a page of argument. And we wonder why more people avoid the board.
Click to expand...
Speak for yourself. I think it’s plain.

As for the rest, I tried ignoring you, but you keep on. You constantly blame but never look at yourself or your posting; e.g. the interchange by PM a while ago where you went off on an embarrassing rant about me, embarrassing to you that is, because your massive misfiring clearly showed your prejudice for all to see who were in that PM. It was hilarious. You came across and a totally prejudiced dick.

As for cliques, why didn’t you ask for that PM, which was for a ‘select’ few, to be made public? Because you were in that supposed ‘clique’, you had objections then, did you? <doh>
I don’t think there is a ‘clique’ on the threads. I find cologne and Toby interesting, BB makes me laugh and I’m interested in his political opining (I don’t share it, but would be much closer to it were I a Scot). I’ve got on with everybody here except SH and you. I bizarrely have far more time for him than you, but then he isn’t sanctimonious.

Whatever, it’s been going on since 606, Lenny, you bore the living crap out of me. There’s little more to be said than ‘go and boil your head’.
 
As far as personal relationships on our forum are concerned we should remember that we, mostly, do not know each other and are ill equipped to make judgement. We have all been on here for quite a long time in a small community and sometimes we will get on each others nerves - particularly when we discuss such explosive material. If we were all in a pub together then I am certain things would be different - misunderstandings would be cleared up more quickly and the links of friendship (or feindship) would be different to those currently existing. At the end of the day we are a group of old men (sorry Dan, Fez, Hornette etc.) trying to keep brain cells alive by this type of debate - the personae which we create on here is often not completely true to our day to day lives. I am not a Kropotkinist Anarcho Communist for 24 hours per day, and 7 days a week <laugh> We just need to remember - a shared pint, and an old English pub somewhere and most of our disagreements would be solved overnight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted....... and Hornette_TID
I am afraid that this thread has wandered far away from the original intention. We cannot have threads turned into a battle ground for people to throw abuse at others. As you will know I do not intervene often, only to ask for a return to the subject as a general rule. However this thread has become nothing to do with environmental issues or new ideas, and unless it gets back to the subject I will have to assume it has served its purpose and it will be closed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hornette_TID
colognehornet said:
At the end of the day we are a group of old men (sorry Dan, Fez, Hornette etc.) trying to keep brain cells alive by this type of debate .
Click to expand...
Yay -someone who thinks 47 isn't old <applause>

Keeping on topic for the thread it is amazing to see how the BBC at it's best can still set an agenda. The action coming from Blue Planet 2 on marine plastics is quite amazing. Small steps of course but nothing ever started without them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: andytoprankin and Toby
Just to get the environmental debate going again. I have just read that 5.4 million people in the UK. are currently receiving treatment for asthma, 1.1 million of those being children. Apparently 3 people die of this every day in the UK. One of the highest rates in Europe. The NHS spends 1 billion pounds per year caring for people with this. It has long been realised that allergy is responsible for less than half of these cases, and that people who live within 500 metres of a motorway grow up with significantly reduced lung capacity, even if they have never had asthma. This is one of the first studies to link traffic pollution with lung damage. Why did it take so long to make the connection ? As a smoker I have always considered the wishes of non smokers not to be poisoned by my fumes - even without laws related to this being enforced. But has any car driver ever asked me if I have a problem with their fumes - no !
 
brian_66_usa said:
You must also take into account that more people live closer to motorways in the uk than most of Europe ? How many of those children have smokers in there house ?
Click to expand...
There is that - and also the number of cars in cities have increased hugely. London can be pretty grim at times with pollution but is it really just cars causing it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back