EU referendum...THE RESULT...and aftermath...

cnut = "abuse"?

Really?

Couldn't be any clearer, could it?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

cnut = "abuse"?

Really?

Couldn't be any clearer, could it?

It is abuse in it's basest sense but on a football forum it's more a term of endearment

You tend to abuse people by insulting their intelligence.

I see.

cnut is affectionately meant.

Bedwetter is... what? A tribute to my virility?

Having a different opinion is trolling.

Communicating it is insulting intelligence.

We are indeed in a post-truth world.

Or you're the one insulting everybody's intelligence not me and Rickler was flat out plainly and crudely insulting me in the basest possible terms which is what inevitably happens when we're at least 25 steps down a line.

Self-regulation, indeed.

What will happen the 26th, 27th, 28th etc time because there's been precious little self-regulation so far.

As you sow, so you reap.

There are two possibilities here. Either you are blissfully unaware of why you may get the reaction you get. (If so, please endeavour to absorb and take on board my last post on this thread.)

Or, you do it purely for the desired reaction - i.e. Trolling in its purest form.

What separates ATD from other Controlled Forums, is that posters are allowed to call out others on relentless, mind-numbing Cunty behaviour.

Am I the only one supposed to self-regulate here?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Am I the only one supposed to self-regulate here?

No, as you are well aware, we are suggesting everyone can self regulate. The problem is self regulation only works when an individual has a idea that his or her posts may be controversial, offensive or just plain trolling.

Give that some thought if I were you.

I have.

Where have I been any of those very subjective things?

If it's subjective, as you state, then why when you are told be multiple users/Mods that a lot of your content falls into a category, do you refuse to accept it?

Why can't anybody think why "cnut" might be unacceptable under any circumstances?

Where do we go from there? It cannot get worse. Actual threats of violence next, I suppose?

"Only bants, innit! Man up ya wanker!"

Czarcasm wrote:

If it's subjective, as you state, then why when you are told be multiple users/Mods that a lot of your content falls into a category, do you refuse to accept it?

Any remote chance you could actually answer this, directly?

Since you're one of the possee hounding me why should I answer directly if I choose not to?

Have I called you a cnut? Or insulted you in any way?

You either want me to post or not.

Which is it?

Can we have a cease fire, at least in calling each other cnuts?

Wouldn't it be nice to get on with me neighbours

Hugh Watt wrote:

Wouldn't it be nice to get on with me neighbours

But they make it very clear, they've got no room for ravers...

seadog wrote:

Can we have a cease fire, at least in calling each other cnuts?

There is no "each other". There is not two equal sides to this with one as bad as the other.

There is one person, arguably two, who has called me a cnut.

I've not called anybody anything.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

seadog wrote:

Can we have a cease fire, at least in calling each other cnuts?

There is no "each other". There is not two equal sides to this with one as bad as the other.

There is one person, arguably two, who has called me a cnut.

I've not called anybody anything.

You do yourself an injustice Frank, I'm shore over the years there will have been thousands.

Rickler wrote:

Hugh Watt wrote:

Wouldn't it be nice to get on with me neighbours

But they make it very clear, they've got no room for ravers...

'ello Mrs Jones,'ow's your Bert's Lumbago?

Les Miserable wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

seadog wrote:

Can we have a cease fire, at least in calling each other cnuts?

There is no "each other". There is not two equal sides to this with one as bad as the other.

There is one person, arguably two, who has called me a cnut.

I've not called anybody anything.

You do yourself an injustice Frank, I'm shore over the years there will have been thousands.

Can we not do it on here though... Pretty please?

No problem, I don't believe I've ever referred to Frank as such.

They do say cnuts are useful so its wasted on some people here!

Czarcasm wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

If it's subjective, as you state, then why when you are told be multiple users/Mods that a lot of your content falls into a category, do you refuse to accept it?

Any remote chance you could actually answer this, directly?

Nope, didn't think so.

I'm not sure how to reply given that anything I am likely to say will be instantly be seized upon as futher evidence of "cunty behaviour".

seadog wrote:

We have banned Lord Lucan and his other manifestations.
Self moderation is key on here, so we appeal to all to keep it civil.

I think posters should read the Geneva Conventions.

Back to mental health though. We all support Argyle so aren't we all basket cases.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'm not sure how to reply given that anything I am likely to say will be instantly be seized upon as futher evidence of "cunty behaviour".

That is true.  You do find it almost impossible to post without demonstrating such behaviour.
Your answer above being the perfect example.

...and poor you again?

LOL.


Anyway....  How's Brexit going for you?  It seems to be keeping you up at night?

Brexit?

No Article 50 = No Brexit.

If it happens I'll let you know.