Tell Telford "Shut the f*** up"

Now, where to start? @Telford has always displayed a great skill at posting stupid things and playing the innocent, going back to the days when he SHOUTED at us all the time. In the last 24h or so he seems to have pulled out all the stops on at least three threads in Purgatory.

Example 1. On the Keir Starmer thread, he posted a typically inane comment that the new Labour leadership hadn't given Jeremy Corbyn a job; which I rather stupidly (because, I know, "do not feed the troll") responded to point out that
It's almost unknown for any former party leader, of any party, to be given a senior position; they simply go onto the back benches to finish their career.
, deliberately using the phrase "almost unknown" because the position given to Ed Milliband by Starmer has been all over the news, the main point being that it would have been very surprising if Starmer had given Corbyn a job other than that of an MP (and, I doubt Corbyn would have wanted it anyway). How did @Telford respond to this? He points to Milliband being given a job, and then decides to attack me by implying that I hadn't been following the news and hadn't chosen my words deliberately
Telford wrote: »
I said "almost".

Tis a pity you failed to spot that it happened in the past week and that Starmer did it.

His continuing repetition of demonstrated lies about Jeremy Corbyn (eg: that he's a "friend of terrorists") is possibly forgivable, after all a large majority of the media has been repeating that tripe for years and the nature of such propaganda is for it to sink in and be accepted as true. But, there doesn't seem to be any reason to call Corbyn names such as "Dear Leader", especially when Corbyn is no longer leader of the Labour Party.

Example 2. On the Socialism/Capitalism thread, a while back he posted an inane comment that people weren't shot for trying to enter East Berlin as though that was even remotely relevant, but then wouldn't let it go, still going on about it this morning. And, then playing the innocent not recognising a link to articles that would educate him.

Example 3. On the Coronavirus thread, he engages in yet more revisionist history claiming that the UK government never had the idea of "herd immunity" as a declared policy and that the lockdown wasn't implemented because the public wouldn't accept it (as opposed to the government claiming that to cover their desire to maintain the economy despite the cost in lives).

I could easily go on, but will stop there (I used to be a Methodist, and have listened to enough sermons to know that three points is a measure of perfection). There's more than enough in just the last few hours to demonstrate what we all know, that is that @Telford is a little shit and that he should do us all a favour and simple shut the fuck up.
«134567

Comments

  • This.
  • With people like this, I wonder if they're stupid, or want to wind people up. But it's not either/or.
  • Thank you for saving me the trouble of calling this trolling tory tosser to hell.
  • It was only a matter of time...
  • Threads like this are like wrestling with a pig.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    Threads like this are like wrestling with a pig.

    Playing chess with a pigeon. It hasn't a clue what it's doing, shits all over the board, knocks the pieces over and struts around as if it's won.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    O what a wonderfully delectable - and accurate - image!
    :naughty:
  • Not only is it as KarlLB says, it is also counter-productive. The repetitive inanity of Telford's tiresome posts results in:

    - My wanting to resign from my own political affiliation.
    - Join the Labour Party.
    - Set up a new group within that Party called Momentous with the sole stated aim of returning Corbyn to his rightful, God-given position as leader and, despite the physical impossibility in my case, to bear his child.

    Telford, if you are listening, it ain't funny and it ain't clever. You are a crushing bore and these boards would be the better for you buzzing off like a mosquito to annoy someone else. Better still, talk to yourself in the mirror and self-isolate for the next 25 years.
  • Only 25 years?
    :naughty:
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    I do not appear to be very popular.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    How perceptive of you!
    :lol:

    What are you going to do about it (assuming that you care)? Enquiring minds need to know...
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Well, that's a pass on Paper 1. Paper 2 explores the reasons for the conclusions reached in Paper 1. Off you go. I suggest a look at Dr Cresswell's study notes above.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    How perceptive of you!
    :lol:

    What are you going to do about it (assuming that you care)? Enquiring minds need to know...

    I may have to remove myself from the platform if I am not allowed on it.
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    Nobody's preventing you from posting. You have to be prepared to justify what you post, though.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Eutychus wrote: »
    Nobody's preventing you from posting. You have to be prepared to justify what you post, though.

    A nice response. Thankyou.
  • It's mostly tone. When you come off as the know-it-all to end all, it puts people off.
  • In the UK it may be unusual. It's not in Canada, also a parliamentary democracy. Former leaders have had senior positions in governments later here. It is unusual for former PMs, and I can't think of one.
  • Telford wrote: »
    How perceptive of you!
    :lol:

    What are you going to do about it (assuming that you care)? Enquiring minds need to know...

    I may have to remove myself from the platform if I am not allowed on it.

    What is it that gives me the impression that you aren't very bright?
  • JonahManJonahMan Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    How perceptive of you!
    :lol:

    What are you going to do about it (assuming that you care)? Enquiring minds need to know...

    I may have to remove myself from the platform if I am not allowed on it.

    What is it that gives me the impression that you aren't very bright?

    Oh, I think I know this one: is it everything Telford posts?
  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding! We have a winner!

    And right off the bat, too! It's almost as if it weren't all that hard for other people to figure out ...
  • In the UK it may be unusual. It's not in Canada, also a parliamentary democracy. Former leaders have had senior positions in governments later here. It is unusual for former PMs, and I can't think of one.

    Does former Ambassador Kim Campbell count? I'd say so.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    In the UK it may be unusual. It's not in Canada, also a parliamentary democracy. Former leaders have had senior positions in governments later here. It is unusual for former PMs, and I can't think of one.

    Does former Ambassador Kim Campbell count? I'd say so.

    Are you two from a parallel universe discussing a different issue altogether?
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    Yes - it's called "Canada". :wink:
  • In the UK it may be unusual. It's not in Canada, also a parliamentary democracy. Former leaders have had senior positions in governments later here. It is unusual for former PMs, and I can't think of one.

    I'm not sure it's all that unusual in the UK either. Of the major party leaders within my memory:

    Conservative Party:

    1. Baroness Thatcher. Served as Prime Minister for 11+ years
    2. Sir John Major. Served as Prime Minister for 7 years. Served a term as backbench MP following his resignation as party leader.
    3. Lord Hague. Party leader for 4 years. Returned to back benches for 9 years, then served for 5 years in cabinet posts under David Cameron.
    4. Sir Iain Duncan Smith. Served as party leader for 2 years. Returned to back benches, then served in the cabinet under David Cameron.
    5. Lord Howard. Served as party leader for 2 years. Returned to back benches.
    6. David Cameron. Served as party leader for 10+ years (PM for 6). Left parliament shortly after resignation
    7. Theresa May. Served as Prime Minister for 3 years. Currently a back bench MP.
    8. Boris Johnson. Current Prime Minister

    Labour Party

    1. Michael Foot. Served as party leader for 3 years. Returned to back benches
    2. Lord Kinnock. Served as party leader for 9 years. Returnd to back benches, then served as European Commissioner
    3. John Smith. Served 2 years as party leader. Died in office.
    4. Tony Blair. Served as party leader for 13 years (PM for 10 years). Left commons after resignation.
    5. Gordon Brown. Served as Prime Minister for 3 years. Served a term on the back benches after resignation as party leader
    6. Ed Miliband. Served as party leader for 5 years. Just been appointed to shadow cabinet.
    7. Jeremy Corbyn. Served as party leader for 5 years. Just resigned.
    8. Sir Kier Starmer. Current party leader

    So if we exclude the people who served as Prime Minister, and exclude Mr. Corbyn, because he's just walked out the door and doesn't count for these purposes, and Mr. Smith, because he died, we have 3 Conservative and 3 Labour leaders to consider.

    Of those, two Tories subsequently held cabinet posts, one Labour has just been appointed to the shadow cabinet, and one served in the European Commission. That just leaves Messrs Foot and Howard not being appointed to some kind of senior post after their term as party leader.
  • This is odd. I thought I remembered Heath saying that Thatcher behaved badly in not giving him a significant post, as that was etiquette for previous leaders. Or maybe she tore up the rule book on that too.
  • KarlLBKarlLB Shipmate
    This appears to be a tangent of the Kier Starmer Purg thread - how did it get here?
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Now, where to start? @Telford has always displayed a great skill at posting stupid things and playing the innocent, going back to the days when he SHOUTED at us all the time. In the last 24h or so he seems to have pulled out all the stops on at least three threads in Purgatory.

    Example 1. On the Keir Starmer thread, he posted a typically inane comment that the new Labour leadership hadn't given Jeremy Corbyn a job; which I rather stupidly (because, I know, "do not feed the troll") responded to point out that
    It's almost unknown for any former party leader, of any party, to be given a senior position; they simply go onto the back benches to finish their career.
    , deliberately using the phrase "almost unknown" because the position given to Ed Milliband by Starmer has been all over the news, the main point being that it would have been very surprising if Starmer had given Corbyn a job other than that of an MP (and, I doubt Corbyn would have wanted it anyway). How did @Telford respond to this? He points to Milliband being given a job, and then decides to attack me by implying that I hadn't been following the news and hadn't chosen my words deliberately
    Telford wrote: »
    I said "almost".

    Tis a pity you failed to spot that it happened in the past week and that Starmer did it.

    His continuing repetition of demonstrated lies about Jeremy Corbyn (eg: that he's a "friend of terrorists") is possibly forgivable, after all a large majority of the media has been repeating that tripe for years and the nature of such propaganda is for it to sink in and be accepted as true. But, there doesn't seem to be any reason to call Corbyn names such as "Dear Leader", especially when Corbyn is no longer leader of the Labour Party.

    Example 2. On the Socialism/Capitalism thread, a while back he posted an inane comment that people weren't shot for trying to enter East Berlin as though that was even remotely relevant, but then wouldn't let it go, still going on about it this morning. And, then playing the innocent not recognising a link to articles that would educate him.

    Example 3. On the Coronavirus thread, he engages in yet more revisionist history claiming that the UK government never had the idea of "herd immunity" as a declared policy and that the lockdown wasn't implemented because the public wouldn't accept it (as opposed to the government claiming that to cover their desire to maintain the economy despite the cost in lives).

    I could easily go on, but will stop there (I used to be a Methodist, and have listened to enough sermons to know that three points is a measure of perfection). There's more than enough in just the last few hours to demonstrate what we all know, that is that @Telford is a little shit and that he should do us all a favour and simple shut the fuck up.

    You are supposed to be an Admin. You should be ashamed of yourself.
  • I think that I'll start frequenting Styx to see where this goes.
  • RuthRuth Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Telford wrote: »
    You are supposed to be an Admin. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Fuck all the way off, asshole. You don't want to get called to Hell by the most reasonable person on the Ship? Then don't post bullshit.
  • RooKRooK Admin Emeritus
    Telford wrote: »
    You are supposed to be an Admin. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    HA HA HA HA HA HA

    [gasp!]

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HAA
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    Ruth wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    You are supposed to be an Admin. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Fuck all the way off, asshole. You don't want to get called to Hell by the most reasonable person on the Ship? Then don't post bullshit.

    You join in the bullying. Well done
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    In the UK it may be unusual. It's not in Canada, also a parliamentary democracy. Former leaders have had senior positions in governments later here. It is unusual for former PMs, and I can't think of one.

    Does former Ambassador Kim Campbell count? I'd say so.

    Joe Clark of course was Secretary Of State For External Affairs under Mulroney, and after that head of the Privy Council.
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    @Telford if after claiming that the UK government had never reversed its covid-19 policy, you were confronted by a link to a direct quote by a cabinet minister stating that it had, you were to acknowledge the mistake instead of playing the victim, you might get on a little better here.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Eutychus wrote: »
    @Telford if after claiming that the UK government had never reversed its covid-19 policy, you were confronted by a link to a direct quote by a cabinet minister stating that it had, you were to acknowledge the mistake instead of playing the victim, you might get on a little better here.

    A nice post but I have far too many enemies just because I speak my mind and sometimes say the wrong thing.
  • Do you ever apologise if you say the wrong thing ?
  • Telford wrote: »
    Eutychus wrote: »
    @Telford if after claiming that the UK government had never reversed its covid-19 policy, you were confronted by a link to a direct quote by a cabinet minister stating that it had, you were to acknowledge the mistake instead of playing the victim, you might get on a little better here.

    A nice post but I have far too many enemies just because I speak my mind.

    No. You don't. And this is the problem, that you don't seem to understand this.

    You keep running into trouble because you make assertions without supporting them. Then when challenged on this you restate your unsupported assertions.

    Purgatory is full of interesting, diverse and smart people. They see through weak arguments very quickly. You don't seem to like being called on this stuff.

    I cannot tell you how much I've learnt in this place, how I've realised I was wrong about things. Equally for the stuff I'm apparently right about* I've had to learn to justify my points and conclusions. It's your refusal to engage in this process that's the problem.

    AFZ

    *obviously I am always right. You know, or, um, not.
  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    *obviously I am always right. You know, or, um, not.
    <citation needed>

  • EutychusEutychus Shipmate
    Telford wrote: »
    A nice post but I have far too many enemies just because I speak my mind and sometimes say the wrong thing.
    What do you mean, the "wrong thing"? If you mean a divergent opinion, then defend it. If you mean an assertion of fact that's demonstrably false (as in the one referred to above), then what's to lose by acknowledging you were mistaken?

    All your post above says is that you prefer to play the victim than admit your mistakes, which doesn't recommend your views to anybody much.
  • Telford wrote: »
    Eutychus wrote: »
    @Telford if after claiming that the UK government had never reversed its covid-19 policy, you were confronted by a link to a direct quote by a cabinet minister stating that it had, you were to acknowledge the mistake instead of playing the victim, you might get on a little better here.

    A nice post but I have far too many enemies just because I speak my mind and sometimes say the wrong thing.

    If you're speaking your mind and saying the wrong thing what does that say about your mind?

    Let the little hamster get some speed up on its wheel, engage the thinking gears and let them run for a while and then try posting. After writing the post take some time to spin the gears up again read what you've written, and to the best of your ability check that it conforms to facts already in the public domain. While doing all this please try to continue breathing, otherwise the hamster may keel over and I'm not sure visits to pet shops are considered essential travel (your carer may be able to persuade police to make an exception under the circumstances).
  • Eutychus wrote: »
    *obviously I am always right. You know, or, um, not.
    <citation needed>

    :lol:

    I really miss the killing me emoticon...
  • Ruth wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    You are supposed to be an Admin. You should be ashamed of yourself.

    Fuck all the way off, asshole. You don't want to get called to Hell by the most reasonable person on the Ship? Then don't post bullshit.

    When reading this, it tookme a moment to realise it was Alan who had started it. Then my interest was definately piqued, because if someome can irritate Alan to this extent, they are being an absolute, grade A asshat.

    And you respond like this:
    Telford wrote: »
    Eutychus wrote: »
    @Telford if after claiming that the UK government had never reversed its covid-19 policy, you were confronted by a link to a direct quote by a cabinet minister stating that it had, you were to acknowledge the mistake instead of playing the victim, you might get on a little better here.

    A nice post but I have far too many enemies just because I speak my mind and sometimes say the wrong thing.

    What I have found is that most people with a persecution complex bring it on themselves. Most of us have some sort of control that takes the random thoughts and realises they are crap before we spout them. Clearly you are missing that bit. I think it is called the Cerebral Cortex.

    It is not that you say the wrong thing. It is that you spout drivel, refuse to offer any support for it, and ignore it when people explain what drivel it is.

    Your refusal to engage tells us that you are not really interested in discussion, just spouting. I bet you fuck like that too.
  • I bet you fuck like that too.

    [assumes facts not in evidence]
  • Baptist TrainfanBaptist Trainfan Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Can I say something, please? Yes, I was irritated by the way our friend Telford dug in his heels and kept on repeating unsupported assertions. I also recognise that it is extremely unusual for Alan to get so riled.

    But - at the risk of being accused of junior hosting or even being called to Hell myself - can I say how upset I've become at the way this thread has gone. I know we're in Hell; but ITSM that people pile on their posts in a way which isn't helpful and can cause real pain. I know that some will say, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen", and I know that a lot of us are stressed at the moment and want to find some release.

    But I feel that these threads tend to gain a negative life of their own which is tangential to the real issue in play and demeans our life together. In other words, I just want to shout out: "PLEASE STOP!"
  • How else can trolls be checked?
  • Baptist TrainfanBaptist Trainfan Shipmate
    edited April 2020
    Strongly but politely, I hope. Or by disengaging entirely, perhaps.
  • That negates the point of Hell.
  • Yes, but sometimes scrolling past, or disengaging completely, are the sensible options if one's own mental health is to be preserved.

    In this case, trying to engage constructively with Telford seems to be akin to knitting Fog, or herding Cats.
  • But I feel that these threads tend to gain a negative life of their own which is tangential to the real issue in play and demeans our life together. In other words, I just want to shout out: "PLEASE STOP!"

    My impression is that this place only really works in this way when there is some expectation of good faith on both sides.
  • Can I say something, please? Yes, I was irritated by the way our friend Telford dug in his heels and kept on repeating unsupported assertions. I also recognise that it is extremely unusual for Alan to get so riled.

    But - at the risk of being accused of junior hosting or even being called to Hell myself - can I say how upset I've become at the way this thread has gone. I know we're in Hell; but ITSM that people pile on their posts in a way which isn't helpful and can cause real pain. I know that some will say, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen", and I know that a lot of us are stressed at the moment and want to find some release.

    But I feel that these threads tend to gain a negative life of their own which is tangential to the real issue in play and demeans our life together. In other words, I just want to shout out: "PLEASE STOP!"

    I don't think there's any doubt that these threads can become Dog piling exercises very quickly.

    I also know I'm not the only one who is cognizant of this and even in Hell, we take our rhetoric down a notch (see above post). I think we should all be careful; as a rule of thumb I try never to write anything online I wouldn't say in person. (I sometimes fail on Twitter).

    However, this Hell-call, like most of its ilk was in response to a pattern of behaviour. Alan started it after a couple of Purg threads but the Shropshire Town was doing the same antisocial behaviour on the Duck Femocracy threat when we were discussing Windrush. I make no apology for feeling strongly about that. My point is that the anger/annoyance felt by many towards Telford is both real and legitimate and thoroughly justified. I won't condone bullying but Shipmates have a right to feel the way they do and it's a basic rule of this place that Hell is the place to express that. We have to trust the hosts to manage this. I've no doubt they'd tell even Alan if he'd gone too far.

    More importantly, all of the above is my view, I do not presume to tell other Shipmates how they should post. If they want to agree with me and express their ire one notch down, great. If not, I'll leave to the hosts to draw the line.

    YMMV. I do think it's worth trying to explain, even in Hell but I may well be wrong about that.

    AFZ
  • This. Thanks.
This discussion has been closed.