Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: BillyStubbsTears on January 11, 2021, 06:06:19 pm
-
Called Reform UK apparently.
So, after f**king us all once over Brexit, it looks like his intention is now to REFUK the country.
-
Is this one a
moneymaking scam limited company as well?
-
Good on him. None of the other parties listen to anything the public want.
-
None of the other parties take money from the public under false pretences either.
-
I always thought a rhino or an elephant were the thickest skinned species on the planet. How wrong was i. The man is a kitson of the highest order. An attention seeking opportunist con man
-
I always thought a rhino or an elephant were the thickest skinned species on the planet. How wrong was i. The man is a kitson of the highest order. An attention seeking opportunist con man
How come you have only mentioned his finer points?
-
I always thought a rhino or an elephant were the thickest skinned species on the planet. How wrong was i. The man is a kitson of the highest order. An attention seeking opportunist con man
Our golf pro is nicknamed The Rhino.
He is thick skinned and charges a lot.
-
On the subject of Farage, it is now 6 days since Trump organised and invited a riot in Congress. This is the only thing Farage has had to say about Trump since.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1347693313374220288
-
On the subject of Farage, it is now 6 days since Trump organised and invited a riot in Congress. This is the only thing Farage has had to say about Trump since.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1347693313374220288
Some of the comments on there are quite unbelievable. The world is full of fcukwits! Where did education go wrong?
-
horses and water?
-
Twitter is just full of crap.
I don’t understand why anyone would want to read it every day and more so, why would anyone put any store on what is written there.
-
Twitter is just full of crap.
I don’t understand why anyone would want to read it every day and more so, why would anyone put any store on what is written there.
You may not understand that Hound, but the point is that tens of millions of people DO get their steer from Twitter. The problem comes when people just accept, unfiltered, what is on there because it matches what they want to hear.
Personally, I try to make sure that I regularly read what is being put on there by people who come from a different philosophical/political angle to me. Partly to challenge my own beliefs. Partly to see what other people are being exposed to. Partly to see who, in the long run, is genuinely trying to be informative and helpful to a proper debate.
So, for example, I'll read Seth Abramson's collation of evidence on Trump's agitation of the coup attempt last week. Evidence based, measured, prepared to correct mistakes/inaccuracies. And I'll also read Andrew Neil's take. Dismissive of it as a serious coup attempt, but critical of Trump's role in fomenting it. And I'll also read Farage's take. Which is to entirely ignore it, then whip up anger at Trump being banned from Twitter.
You get an insight into people's methods and motives and it helps you to judge who you should believe in future.
The alternative is to close you eyes and make your judgments based on nothing. Or to simply accept what the people you like say.
-
In other words.
Use it properly and it is challenging and educational
Use it badly and it just reinforces what you already believe.
Ignore it and you have little idea what is going on in a fast-changing world.
Problem is, everyone in all those categories has a vote...
-
Or be like me and not devote my life to reading such as twitter or Instagram all day long.
-
Which raises the question of how you form your opinions.
-
BST, regarding using it badly means it just reinforces what you already believe, I assume your point is don't just go looking for examples that confirm your own beliefs in order to strengthen your own resolve?
If that's the case, have you ever come across a comment that made you change your mind regarding your own beliefs?
-
Many times BB. In all sorts of different directions.
I think by using the word "comment" though, you're missing the point. Comments on their own are pretty much worthless. What makes me reflect is analysis. Putting together evidence and showing where it leads.
-
BST, regarding using it badly means it just reinforces what you already believe, I assume your point is don't just go looking for examples that confirm your own beliefs in order to strengthen your own resolve?
If that's the case, have you ever come across a comment that made you change your mind regarding your own beliefs?
I read The Guardian website now and again just to remind myself how detached from reality the champagne socialists are.
-
Many times BB. In all sorts of different directions.
I think by using the word "comment" though, you're missing the point. Comments on their own are pretty much worthless. What makes me reflect is analysis. Putting together evidence and showing where it leads.
Have you any examples of them that you have shared on this forum among the many you've shared that side with your own beliefs?
-
There's an example from just yesterday BB
I originally posted that the free school meals company were charging the Govt £30 per pack. Later on I saw a tweet from the company saying it was actually £10.55. I posted that figure as soon as I saw it.
-
BST, with respect that's hardly an example of you changing your mind. That is just correcting an inflated figure, which, incidentally, would have been called a lie if a member of the government or one of its supporters had said it.
-
If you insist BB.
Changing of opinions is usually a slower process and it's difficult to point to a Road to Damascus miment. But I'll give you one example.
At the start of the COVID crisis, I didn't understand epidemic economics. I thought the choice was between accepting a rapid and huge epidemic, or accepting a lockdown that crippled businesses and put 10 million out of work.
Seeing Sunak's furlough scheme analysed online, with the willingness of this Govt to accept massive borrowing discussed and laid out totally changed my understanding and I supported that approach by the Govt.
-
I suspect that was a case of the government appearing to be moving in a direction that you approved of more than you moving towards their way of thinking.
-
Yes BB. You suspect a lot without merit.
I'll give you a much longer-term one. 12 years ago, I was very much in favour of us joining the Euro. What I hadn't understood at the time, and what I learned from reading contributions by leading economists on social media was the restrictions on Government fiscal policy that occurred when you weren't in control of your own currency. I realised from that, over time, that we had made a very sensible decision to stay out.
Happy to keep this going as long as you want.
But given that I've now given you an example from yesterday, an example from last year and an example from last decade, an example of correcting a fact, an example of changing my opinion on a senior Tory minister and an example of changing my opinion on the biggest macroeconomic issue of the century, I'm struggling to see what further purpose it would serve.
-
Well, I was thinking more of party political points scoring changes of view, but I suppose going back 12 years to find (a sort of lame) one of the many on this forum is a start.
-
And THAT post of yours gets to the bottom of your problem BB.
I don't post to score party political points. If I see things that I think are reprehensible or lies, or hypocrisy, I point it out. If I see things that I think are praiseworthy, I praise them.
You assume it is all about scoring points, which perhaps says a lot about your attitude. An attitude that, when I say I praised a Tory Chancellor who found a way to steer a course last March between hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of job losses, you dismiss that as being praise just because it moved in a direction I approved of.
Stop and have a reflection on just what you were thinking when you wrote that. Because, if I wasn't used to you doing this, I'd be disgusted by the implication behind it.
As it is, I'm not disgusted by it, because I suspect the implication never dawned on you when you wrote it. You were just diving in to your "let's stoke an argument" mode without thinking it through.
-
Which raises the question of how you form your opinions.
Sorry BST for such a long time passing before I replied to your question.
I have been busy.
Anyway, I wasn’t aware that Twitter and Instagram are the only places available from which news worthy of forming an opinion comes from.
-
And THAT post of yours gets to the bottom of your problem BB.
I don't post to score party political points. If I see things that I think are reprehensible or lies, or hypocrisy, I point it out. If I see things that I think are praiseworthy, I praise them.
You assume it is all about scoring points, which perhaps says a lot about your attitude. An attitude that, when I say I praised a Tory Chancellor who found a way to steer a course last March between hundreds of thousands of deaths and millions of job losses, you dismiss that as being praise just because it moved in a direction I approved of.
Stop and have a reflection on just what you were thinking when you wrote that. Because, if I wasn't used to you doing this, I'd be disgusted by the implication behind it.
As it is, I'm not disgusted by it, because I suspect the implication never dawned on you when you wrote it. You were just diving in to your "let's stoke an argument" mode without thinking it through.
And this post of yours BST clearly provides evidence of your deep-seated problem at the point where you begin to attack the person and not the subject.
To say you haven't spent most, if not all of this pandemic politically points scoring is beyond ridiculous.
-
BB
Feel free to point out a single criticism of the Govt that I've made which hasn't been based on, and evidenced by facts.
After you've stopped and thought about the implications of your earlier post.
Take your time.
-
Hound.
So tell me. What sources DO you use?
-
I use tv and radio news bulletins and some things I pick up internet news articles.
Oh, and this forum of course.
However I should say that I don’t spend as much time as you do searching for things to post on here about.
Forgive me for asking, but how do you find time to oversee your business.
-
I'm a very efficient person Hound. No need to worry on that score.
-
But back to the core issue. I assume you realise that you are picking up information that has been filtered and editorialised?
-
BB
Feel free to point out a single criticism of the Govt that I've made which hasn't been based on, and evidenced by facts.
After you've stopped and thought about the implications of your earlier post.
Take your time.
BST, you have already given me an example of you correcting a fact you previously claimed to be true just six posts back. I was hoping you'd give me some more examples while you were at it.
-
And that was corrected the moment I realised it was wrong.
And it wasn't a criticism of the Govt.
Other than that, well done!
Any more?
-
hp and tomato?
-
But back to the core issue. I assume you realise that you are picking up information that has been filtered and editorialised?
So are you suggesting that information posted on Twitter etc is the truth just because it hadn’t been filtered.
Having said what you have done though, lots of posters on here quote Guardian articles and expect us to take them to be factual.
-
No Hound. I'm saying that you can, over time, judge for yourself who is more consistently telling the truth, being consistent and getting calls right.
Hard work though, I grant you.
On the topic of conventional media, there's a similar process required to assess who is trustworthy. Of course all media outlets have editorial policy and that is inevitably influenced by the political position of the particular media source.
There are two very different outputs that media organisations present and you need to consider the differences when appraising media.
1) Opinion pieces and editorials. These are, by their very nature, biased in certain directions because it is people giving opinions. So you need to think about which direction the bias is likely to be in a given newspaper. You should go into that with your eyes open and be prepared to be critical. Personally, I don't give a great deal of credence to opinion pieces, unless they are very well backed up by clear evidence. Often they are not - they are just the prejudices of the writer.
2) Factual reporting. This is more about the "news". Again, newspapers will choose what news to highlight. But there's a key difference between different papers. Some will deliberately and knowingly misinform readers to suit their political angle. From experience, I don't believe the Guardian, Times or Telegraph do that. They may make mistakes, but I don't believe they deliberately try to misinform. From close up personal experience, I know for a fact that the Mail does. So, personally, I rank mainstream media outlets on a scale from "generally trustworthy on news facts" to "I wouldn't trust a word they say without corroboration."
You need the same approach with Twitter. The difference is that no-one is editorialising Twitter so you can expose yourself to a wide range of sources and angles.
And I do realise I'm being hopelessly optimistic and that most people won't.
-
Talk radio asks questions that I want answers to, and argues the inconsistencies that I would argue...
Alex Belfield is a very clever man who makes me laugh...
And if I want an insight into proper intelligent debate I watch and read Christopher Hitchens
All other media sources are directed by the 13 families of which we should not go their......
-
Alex Belfield is a very clever man who makes me laugh...
Aye, he's hilarious.
https://www.thatstageyblog.com/post/stop-alex-belfield
-
Talk radio asks questions that I want answers to, and argues the inconsistencies that I would argue...
Alex Belfield is a very clever man who makes me laugh...
And if I want an insight into proper intelligent debate I watch and read Christopher Hitchens
All other media sources are directed by the 13 families of which we should not go their......
Christopher Hitchens died ten years ago. I assume you mean Peter Hitchens? He was an utter disgrace at the start of the COVID crisis. He blatantly misrepresented the Imperial College predictions of death tolls, with the express intention of undermining confidence in the epidemiologists. He claimed that, within a week, they had changed their predicted death toll from 500,000 to 25,000 and poured scorn on an analysis that could change like that. What he didn't say (and he must have known it) was that one study was about what would happen if the virsu was left unchecked, and the other was the effect of lockdown.
I cannot put into words how much I despise t**ts like that. Using a privileged position of influence to deliberately misinform people. He and his like would be the first in the stocks if I were in charge. They are a cancer.
-
Alex Belfield is a very clever man who makes me laugh...
Aye, he's hilarious.
https://www.thatstageyblog.com/post/stop-alex-belfield
Christ, that's like reading an unfolding mental breakdown, manifested as insane cyber bullying.
-
Is it similar to yours and your mates mental breakdown on here for the last four and a half years Billy?
-
Read it and tell us how it is.
-
Read it and tell us how it is.
Bold of you to assume a bored troll has any interest in doing anything other than trying to wind people up.
-
Read it and tell us how it is.
Bold of you to assume a bored troll has any interest in doing anything other than trying to wind people up.
Just showing it up, I doubt he even read it in the first place.