There are a group of people on this forum who have arrogantly set themselves up as some sort of self-appointed moral guardians. They spend their entire time patrolling these forums issuing warnings and reprimands to posters who do not happen to agree with their political agenda!
These self-appointed moral guardians are perfectly willing and able to dictate, pontificate and occasionally intimidate those who are a), new and innocent to this forum, and b), those who they disagree with.
It is interesting to note that as a public forum the number of regular posters is about two dozen - a remarkably small number. Why is this the case? It will be argued that many potential posters have been frigthened off by the bully-boy tactics of the self-appointed moral guardians?
The self-appointed moral guardians.
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
I must admit I agree with you... and of course no need to name names
They're locking them up today, they're throwing away the key...I wonder who it be tomorrow, you or me?
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
Aw, what's wrong? Fed up that someone actually challenges your points and calls them racist when they are racist, elitist when they are elitist, and reactionary when they are reactionary? It must be hurtful to think you are the voice of reason, and to discover someone else thinks you might be a bigot---but that is the nature of debate.
When I'm wrong, and proved to be wrong, I hold my hands up to it. Only a complete arsehole continues to argue when even he knows the point is lost. Many times I've been told I'm talking bollocks, and I concede the point when it's proved. It would suit some here not to have their claims challenged---but when it is, it's as if someone has stolen their football. Verbally fight your corner, if you think you have a case.
Moral guardian? I have values I believe in, and will champion them. Like most liberal (small l) types, I tend to think most people are reasonable and rational and open to logical debate. If you prefer to get your beliefs from the banner headlines of newspapers, then fine, that's up to you.
It's a strange world where liberal, morals and reason are considered bad things.
When I'm wrong, and proved to be wrong, I hold my hands up to it. Only a complete arsehole continues to argue when even he knows the point is lost. Many times I've been told I'm talking bollocks, and I concede the point when it's proved. It would suit some here not to have their claims challenged---but when it is, it's as if someone has stolen their football. Verbally fight your corner, if you think you have a case.
Moral guardian? I have values I believe in, and will champion them. Like most liberal (small l) types, I tend to think most people are reasonable and rational and open to logical debate. If you prefer to get your beliefs from the banner headlines of newspapers, then fine, that's up to you.
It's a strange world where liberal, morals and reason are considered bad things.
Pervert
The Worlds Biggest Collector Of Ben Dover DVD`s
Koppite Till I Die
Remember - You`ll Never Walk Alone
The Worlds Biggest Collector Of Ben Dover DVD`s
Koppite Till I Die
Remember - You`ll Never Walk Alone
-
Sam Slater
- Posts: 11624
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
I agree that some people are sometimes a little quick to judge somebody, or presume what paper they read/political standing they have from one post; that pisses me off greatly.
However, pulling someone up and what they feel is wrong, or contradictory to other posts by the same person is just natural debate, and what forums are founded upon. Where would forums be without debate and alternative views?
However, pulling someone up and what they feel is wrong, or contradictory to other posts by the same person is just natural debate, and what forums are founded upon. Where would forums be without debate and alternative views?
[i]I used to spend a lot of time criticizing Islam on here in the noughties - but things are much better now.[/i]
-
eroticartist
- Posts: 2941
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
Don't go left or right but straight on to freedom. The future is green.
Mike Freeman.
Mike Freeman.
amazon.com/author/freeman
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
How do I sign up to be an IMmoral guardian?
That would balance things out; I could flame those who were guilty of
being TOO easy-going and rational, and castigate those weak sisters
who caved in to such fripperies as reasoned argument.........
That would balance things out; I could flame those who were guilty of
being TOO easy-going and rational, and castigate those weak sisters
who caved in to such fripperies as reasoned argument.........
"a harmless drudge, that busies himself in tracing the original, and detailing the
signification...."
signification...."
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
!grin!
I'm sure you could just do it, no signature required, JJ.
I'm sure you could just do it, no signature required, JJ.
Pervert
The Worlds Biggest Collector Of Ben Dover DVD`s
Koppite Till I Die
Remember - You`ll Never Walk Alone
The Worlds Biggest Collector Of Ben Dover DVD`s
Koppite Till I Die
Remember - You`ll Never Walk Alone
-
fudgeflaps
- Posts: 3339
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: The self-appointed moral guardians.
It's never good to resort to abuse.... I like to think when I've been proved wrong by hard fact or learned opinion, I simply acknowledge that it's "fair enough".
When there is a bit of personal niggling, a bit of defensiveness is tolerable. Ignorance is the best reply in these instances: however, in theses cases, the provocation shouldn't be there in the first place.
Sometimes, however, it is justified- not vitriolic abuse per se, but piss-take abuse. This is exemplified by a few resident trolls and leeching cretins like chrisd who is incidentally at it again on the British Girls forum; his "I've set up a Yahoo group for you, by the way" argument in order to get yet more free pics is despicable.
In reply to your post, Trumpy, I don't really see your point mate, sorry. There are no bully-boy tactics, just strong passionate opinions. There are aspects of points-scoring contests at times, I'll grant you, but these often veer in a different direction mid-thread- you can exercise your freedom of choice not to read the petty "I know more than you, ha-ha-ha" posts.
When there is a bit of personal niggling, a bit of defensiveness is tolerable. Ignorance is the best reply in these instances: however, in theses cases, the provocation shouldn't be there in the first place.
Sometimes, however, it is justified- not vitriolic abuse per se, but piss-take abuse. This is exemplified by a few resident trolls and leeching cretins like chrisd who is incidentally at it again on the British Girls forum; his "I've set up a Yahoo group for you, by the way" argument in order to get yet more free pics is despicable.
In reply to your post, Trumpy, I don't really see your point mate, sorry. There are no bully-boy tactics, just strong passionate opinions. There are aspects of points-scoring contests at times, I'll grant you, but these often veer in a different direction mid-thread- you can exercise your freedom of choice not to read the petty "I know more than you, ha-ha-ha" posts.