OK – listen up, all posters of comments.
I’ve been told that posters are using abusive language to each other. If I see it, I’ll take it down and the poster will be on a yellow card.
I’ve been told I have compared the DUP to dogs. I’ve searched but failed to find this. If anyone finds it, please let me know. The same rules apply to bloggers as to posters.
Final and most important point: if you enjoy posting comments and reading those of others, then make sure that debate is conducted in a civilized way: that is, no abuse and no potential libel OF ANYONE. If I find that I have to keep coming back to check on lapses in this on a regular basis, I plan to close down the posting of comments. The prospect of this will delight some people; if you’re a poster I assume you’ll be disappointed. So I’m very happy to see spirited debate, I don’t even mind stupidity, but I won’t allow abuse or potential libel. It’ll be yellow and then, if necessary, red cards. And if I have to dish out too many of those, an end to comments. Sin é.
Probably…guilty as charged….depending an the attitude of others , I would never deliberately abuse anyone ….but a valid point of view may be misconstrued by others.
Dogs are loyal, DUP claim to be loyal. Nice to see similar traits.
Hat, coat. Aff out
As long as it was dogd, not alligators
Oh, they are getting sensitive. I remember a leading DUP MP calling Alex Maskey “lead belly” after he had been shot by loyalists.
As long as it was dogs and not britches. Or is that sexist?
Bitches. Damned. predictive .text.
It’s well seeing some have a thick skin otherwise you’d have a lot more complaints on this blog………..especially about the abuse and language(dressed up in nice words) aimed at those of a republican background. Demonising republicans allthewhile making excuses for unionism is rank hypocrisy in my book no matter how letsgetalongerist it may sound.
I know if only reading it was optional!!
Ho Hum the unionists win again another outlet for a nationalist point of view/comment maybe shut down oh well Tiocfaidh ár lá. The cant stop us at the voting booth LOL.
Stephen
It is those who cannot make an argument without resorting to name calling who are risking getting the comments shut down.
So maybe they should examine themselves.
Gio, wasn’t it you who called George Galloway a “self regarding buffoon?”
Patrick
Here is what I said:
“There was me thinking he was just a self regarding buffoon.
How wrong I was!”
Gio,
This implies you called him that and more!
Emmet
Afraid not. It implies I thought it.
Not even I want to impose a ban on thinking bad things!
“Afraid not. It implies I thought it.
Not even I want to impose a ban on thinking bad things!”
Ok so. So if I “think” you are a sxxx stirrer and supporter of unionist and British terrorism that would be ok then? Just as long as I “thought it”? Btw, it is ironic that one is consulting you rather than the owner of the blog on what is permitted on this blog.
wolfie
You can of course think what you like. But if you put it on the comment page you might at least back it up.
I don’t have any say in what is permitted here, as Jude will no doubt confirm. He has stipulated his rules many times before so take it up with him if you don’t like them.
Gio, you “thought” Galloway was a buffoon without backing it up. Btw, what I think of you I have no call to back it up…….you do that for me all by yourself.
wolfie
Did you not read what I said
I clearly said that having thought him a buffoon I now saw that I was wrong.
Gio, please don’t pxxx in my bucket and tell me it’s rainwater. For example if I said: “I think Gio was just a supporter of unionist and British terrorism; how wrong was I!” can be interpreted in different ways dontcha think? It could mean that I now thought you were not a supporter or it could also imply you were something even worse. Play around with words all you like but there’s no escaping what you are.
Haha. You’re a laugh Gio. You did indeed think it. You then proceeded to write it. I think this could constitute a very mild form of ‘name calling’. But no big deal. I won’t waste any great deal of time arguing this with someone who I think seems somewhat twisted whilst making his contributions on this blog. No offence or anything, I’m just saying what I think like!!
wolfie
I can’t be responsible for how people interpret what I say.
As for my support for British and unionist terrorism since you cannot produce one post from me to back that up I would say it is just as well you keep it to yourself.
Nice talking to you as always!
“As for my support for British and unionist terrorism since you cannot produce one post from me to back that up I would say it is just as well you keep it to yourself.”
I am sure I could but alas life is too short to waste it on letsgetalongerists (unionist Trojan horse) such as you as they endeavour to demean and demonise those of a republican ilk.
Yip nice talking to you too.
Gio, sorry to tell you this but having a thought is fine, but once you type it you have said it.
My statement still stands:
Gio,
This implies you called him that and more.
I enjoy reading Jude’s and others’ topics on here but I also like reading the comments. Sometimes I feel frustrated by some of the answers (hey, that’s the nature of debate and I’m sure I have frustrated others) but try not to let that colour how I reply.
I would hate for the comments to be closed down, so let’s try to keep our replies civil but robust. Jude’s site provides an opportunity for us to communicate with others we would not normally communicate with. Communication is good, even if we disagree, as long as it is done as respectfully as you can.
So be frustrated but never abusive.
Robust debate. Respect. Not much to ask.
Most posters make their points without resorting to abuse. If someone falls foul of your card system Jude punish them only. I enjoy reading your blog and I enjoy reading the opinions of my fellow political junkies. Long may that continue.
I heard a water protestor call Enda Kenny a “count” (or a very similar sounding noun) on RTE once and the sky did’nt fall down!
RTÉ can be forgiven for allowing that ‘count’ comment to go through as it only occurred once and not a number of times. If it had been supplemented by additional contributions of a similar vein it could have ended up a total mess the results of which may have been incalculable!
On a similar but separate note what is the group description for ‘counts’ such as for ‘gaggle’ of geese?
The local definition Down here is ‘shower’ but I am not sure if that is right!
I have to admit, I am somewhat dismayed at the liberal, especially now in germany, attempt to stifle free speech.
(I am nor referring to Jude, clearly he has reason for this warning shot)
If one calls another names, at some distance, and in writing then, what is the real harm, as the old saying goes, ‘sticks and stones might break my bones but names will never hurt me’ and, at several miles distance, it is difficult to reach out and slap some ‘always offended’ in the gob.
Mark
I am not particularly bothered if someone calls me names. As you say it can’t hurt me and given that I am anonymous it does not even feel personal.
But it drags the debate into the gutter.
If you call me a bigot and I respond by calling you a terrorist sympathiser well it’s mot much of a conversation is it?
The other thing that bugs me is that daily abuse is given to public figures either from unionism or the media (Nolan frequently) or the British state. Often this is stupid stuff like how fat or ugly someone is or how unfeminine they are. Sometimes it is worse like mocking for example Arlene’s experience as a child, or Willie Frazer’s strange behaviour.
These are people with families who are probably reading stuff like this about someone close to them
All of that is pathetic in my view and certainly not the sort of stuff real republicans should be coming out with.
What purpose does it serve?
“These are people with families who are probably reading stuff like this about someone close to them
All of that is pathetic in my view and certainly not the sort of stuff real republicans should be coming out with.
What purpose does it serve?”
And yet you were quite happy to continually slur Martin McGuinness quite soon after his untimely passing. It seemed like every positive comment made by someone on this blog was followed up with one by yourself Gio stating how he ‘couldn’t possibly have had a life well lived’ or other comments sneering at his alleged crimes. Backing up your thoughts with evidence or bearing in mind that perhaps members of his family may have been reading them and be upset by them didn’t seem to bother you too much. Perhaps it’s only criticism of those from a unionist background that ‘bugs’ you? That’s the impression I get from you anyway.
But anyway life is too short. I enjoy Jude’s blogs and think he deserves great credit for this site. I too really enjoy the comments and hope Jude doesn’t stop them, but ultimately if they’re causing him more bother than he feels they’re worth then I wouldn’t blame him for pulling the comments section. He’s kept this site going for I don’t know how long now and owes us nothing.
Good luck to all contributors, whether I agree with their thoughts and sentiments or not!!
Patrick
If you look back to the time of McGuinness’s death you will see I made no comment at all for several days.
It was only the constant hagiography that led me to add my views.
I don’t know how I slurred him so maybe you can remind me.
In fact I referred to the good work he had done as a politician several times.
Commenting about the pertinent deeds of someone’s life is acceptable surely otherwise we may as well all call it a day.
It is not only abuse of those from a unionist background that bugs me, its just that that is pretty much the only kind there is around these parts.
I don’t see why Jude should have to shut down commenting though that is up to him.
The blog would soon die if he did, in my view.
A bit of rigorous enforcement would soon focus minds, I think.
Gio, I’m aware you did hold fire in the couple of days after Martins death. I don’t really have the desire to rake through all your old comments from that time (as said life is too short ), but I think it’s fair to say that they were generally quite begrudging of the man in the main.
You talk about commenting on the “pertinent deeds of someone’s life” as being acceptable, and who could argue with that, but what you were doing was almost smearing by innuendo and inference. You seemed to use every action/atrocity committed by the IRA as a stick to beat Martin with, despite having no evidence (which I know you’re so fond of asking others of).
I think you’re stretching your credibility if you’re seriously suggesting the only abuse flung from this blog is towards unionists. You’re not above making your barbed comments and derogatory remarks about SF and its personnel and who could forget Neill or Norma or MT et al? It wasn’t below them to hurl the insults. I think Neill once stated that Republicans were happy to support sexual abusers and that Unionists were morally superior than nationalists. You never seem to get bugged by that as far as I see.
So anyway. I guess I just take a wee bit of exception as to how you generally conduct yourself on this blog. You could be a great guy for all I know and I wish you well as I do to all, but I think you’re often snide and contrary for no good reason on this blog and it makes me wonder “what purpose does it serve?”
Hi Patrick
Probably best not to get back into the debate about McGuinness, so I will just say that I disagree with how you are representing my comments from that time. If you want to present any relevant ones I will be happy to discuss them.
You are right there have been comments against SF people, some of it nasty, but as I said in the main it is going the other way, and Jude often seems to notice the anti SF remarks and takes action, as happened with MT for the crime of using ‘Provisional Sinn Fein’
So yes I probably like to swim against the flow to some extent, but I accept I can be a bit sarky at times. I will try to be better.
Fair enough Gio. I think we could all probably try to be better at times in truth. But anyway good luck to you.
Patrick.
Gio, I don’t always have the time to use Jude’s blog site but I do feel that it is useful to get an alternative to the mainstream (mostly pro-unionist perspective) media.
Because I only visit the site infrequently I have observed a noticeable shift in the nature of your comments.
Previously I may not have agreed with your perspective but it was always one which may have provided an alternative viewpoint which occasionally prompted me to try and challenge my own views.
It is always useful to have a counterbalancing viewpoint to the dominant narrative including on this site but those counterbalancing viewpoints lose credibility when they start to challenge everything and everybody and personalise arguments.
What has happened to you Gio? What was the last straw issue that had you cross the rubicon?
Pointis
Erm… not sure! Now I will have to go off and do some navel gazing.
If you can give me some specific examples of how I have gone astray it might help.
But I am not too interested in self examination as it is just another form of man playing really albeit the man is oneself.
I am happy to discuss the actual content of any post I have put up and I am sure like everybody I have put up some stupid comments.
I do tend to react to particularly unpleasant or one sided stuff that I read so maybe there has been a lot of that lately which has provoked me to respond.
Does anyone care? I doubt it.
Let’s just stick to arguing the points and leave personality out of it.
I might add that I find your posts generally thoughtful and worth reading so…take that!
I wasn’t trying to be hurtful to you Gio I was just wondering if something had particularly frustrated you such as the collapse of the institutions or the continued polarisation of the electorate here but I take your word that none of these are the case.
Thank you for you kind comments and I do hope you stick around.
Ta bron orm Gio, my point was on the stifling of ‘free speech’, what is your opinion on that, as above, the German’s, via their vehicle, the EU, are attempting to remove what they call ‘hate speech’ from comments on-line, yes, much of this is a little silly but, if you are so offended by words that you lose sleep or head to the GP for anti-depressants, perhaps putting one’s pc in the bin is an idea.
Germany for instance has just introduced a federal law to out law on-line abusive words, they push for an EU wide approach, how this will fit with the ECHR right to freedom of expression or, the right in Bunreacht na hÉireann is beyond me and leaves me wondering, do we need further referendum?
The DUPs love of ‘Dog whistle Politics’…………. perhaps its only right?
If I might intervene on the gio and George G debate: I have my own thoughts as you (all) obviously have, but it strikes me as the kind of thing I DON’T want. To quote the esteemed Mick Fealty, it’s playing the man not the ball. It’s also dipping into the past, which is time-wasting except it improves the present and future. So lay off slagging each other , you shower of….No, sorry, rush of blood there. Debate points raised, not little niggling garbage. And yes, calling someone a count or even a cunt is abusive. Don’t.
An féidir linn as an tanga Naisunts?
I was merely quoting a young female water protester and not describing Kenny thus myself ! It would not be part of my everyday vocabulary and I have only used it sparingly since the age of seven when I first heard it used by my late uncle to describe a bullock that had just stood on his foot!