Telford

12346

Comments

  • O - sorry. My bad.

    Yes, good point, but I thought you were referring to the Boris thread here in Hell.

    As regards other threads, I agree that it's best to ignore his egregious one-liners, and to go back to a previous, and sensible, post from someone else.

    Not always easy, and I plead Guilty as Charged, m'Lud.
  • RockyRoger wrote: »
    I repeat my observation that Telford is an emotional vampire (vide 'What we do in the Shadows') feeding on the irritation he engenders. The Boris thread is now filling with his stuff because people, otherwise sane rational people, are, despite all the dangers in doing this, feeding him. Please, please stop!
    There are worse than he that people keep feeding.
  • O - sorry. My bad.

    Yes, good point, but I thought you were referring to the Boris thread here in Hell.

    As regards other threads, I agree that it's best to ignore his egregious one-liners, and to go back to a previous, and sensible, post from someone else.

    Not always easy, and I plead Guilty as Charged, m'Lud.
    The problem with that strategy is that someone else will reply and their reply might have something of value, necessitating reading the offending poster for context.
  • Yes, that's true, and has been pointed out to me before.
    :disappointed:

    However, there are still some emanations from the Pot-Plant that can safely be passed over...
    :wink:
  • (From the Boris Johnson thread)
    Telford wrote: »
    Yes, well I haven't been following the new normal thread. On this thread you very clearly said that parents should take responsibility for feeding their children - while we're discussing a government decision to not provide them with any additional assistance to do that.

    I still see it as the parent's responsibity and more than one meal a day as well.

    However if Kids quailify for a free meal it should be all year.

    When I read that the government voted to starve kids it really annoyed me because that's not what happened.

    @Telford, I totally understand that someone made a statement that you thought was wrong, and it annoyed you. I have no beef with you, but my observation is that it’s exactly this kind of thing that frustrates other people from your posting. You frequently make statements that other people think are wrong, and then you don’t back them up.

    For example, on that same thread, when you said that child hunger wasn’t an issue until recently, that annoyed me. Because it literally has been for the history of this country, and saying it wasn’t an issue minimised the suffering of all those kids.

    I get you have opinions - we all do - the beauty of the Ship has always been that any opinion we give has to stand up to the scrutiny of a whole bunch of very intelligent people. I’ve appreciated having my opinions trashed and refined over the years, because so many of our opinions can just be assumptions or inherited, and not fully thought through. Any time I chuck out a couple of sentences saying “it’s this way”, I have to be ready to back that up, because if a lot of people give evidence and reason to dispute that, could well be I’m wrong.
  • (From the Boris Johnson thread)
    Telford wrote: »
    Yes, well I haven't been following the new normal thread. On this thread you very clearly said that parents should take responsibility for feeding their children - while we're discussing a government decision to not provide them with any additional assistance to do that.

    I still see it as the parent's responsibity and more than one meal a day as well.

    However if Kids quailify for a free meal it should be all year.

    When I read that the government voted to starve kids it really annoyed me because that's not what happened.

    @Telford, I totally understand that someone made a statement that you thought was wrong, and it annoyed you. I have no beef with you, but my observation is that it’s exactly this kind of thing that frustrates other people from your posting. You frequently make statements that other people think are wrong, and then you don’t back them up.

    He is the sole protagonist of reality.
  • Aaaaand he's at it again wrt postal votes in Purg.

    @Telford - take a step back and observe what you're doing there, there's a good chap. This is exactly the sort of thing that gets people's backs up.
  • please tell me where so I can avoid him. He reminds be a bit of Arnold J. Rimmer of 'Red Dwarf' infamy.
  • RockyRoger wrote: »
    please tell me where so I can avoid him. He reminds be a bit of Arnold J. Rimmer of 'Red Dwarf' infamy.

    On here:

    https://forums.shipoffools.com/discussion/2992/us-election-eve/p5
  • RockyRoger wrote: »
    please tell me where so I can avoid him. He reminds be a bit of Arnold J. Rimmer of 'Red Dwarf' infamy.

    Yes, but Rimmer was funny. Telford is just plain irritating...
    :grimace:

  • WTF have posters allowed Telford to derail what was a satisfyingly amusing Piffel thread? Won't they ever learn? Now it's about whether people like him. I repeat, please, please stop!
  • But now we know he has a little list of people who don't like him. I can just imagine him sitting in his bunker, furiously scribbling names in a little black book. Although really it should be entitled "People who think I'm a stupid, irritating twat because of the way I post". But that level of self-awareness is far beyond Telford.
  • orfeoorfeo Shipmate
    mousethief wrote: »
    If someone is gong through trauma they may be just as likely to be contentious on here. Either getting it out of their system or having little choice because it is now who they are. Didn't you find that with the pupils you taught?

    As I see it, you are making this a little personal. I could read your OP to Telford as being along the lines of trying to make him feel guilty if you had to stop posting. You seemed to think I was talking about you when I wrote about motivation. It is how I generally perceive it here. If that's wrong by others then I have no worries about that: it's how I see it. You've taken issue with others.

    You seem to be saying if someone is having a rough time it's okay for them to be shitty to us here, but it's not okay for us (who may or may not be having a rough time) to vent about it. A little one-sided isn't it?

    No I'm not saying it's ok - I'm saying that it happens. I'm not that bothered about the reacting/venting from one person, either. What does concern me is when one person piles in and others quickly join in the melee. It's like being in the playground seeing someone starting the kicking and joining in, partly because you want the approval of the person starting it all as much as you want to vent yourself. The joining in is the least attractive element of worrying opportunity.

    The joining in can also be seen as taking up the cudgels on someone else's behalf.

    It would be more accurate, on many occasions, to describe this process as a whole BUNCH of people thinking much the same thing, and the dam breaking when one of that bunch has finally had enough to actually say the thing that they're all thinking.

    Because that's just how human nature frequently works. Despite the portrayal sometimes of how everyone is just itching to be nasty, often what happens is that lots of people have been restraining themselves and trying to be nice.

    And yes, it's true, one person doing something gives others permission to also do it. When being angry is not the done thing, it's a lot easier to be angry once someone else has started to be publicly angry.

    But it's a complete myth that the first time someone says something, or in this case writes something, is also the first time that someone has thought it. Many's the time on the Ship when a considerable number of people have all thought that one Shipmate is being unreasonable and objectionable, but it takes some time before one of them finally decides that it's gone far enough to be a Hell call.

    I can certainly remember times when I've got to the point of deciding to take something to Hell, only to discover that someone else has had the same reaction to the same post or posts within, say, half a day before. The wonder of timezones and all that.

    So no. It's not at all like the playground. The fact that a number of people have the same opinion is not evidence of a mob. It's often evidence that it's an opinion widely shared by a lot of people.
  • I presume I'm on said list. Would be offended if I wasn't. Even though it's not really true.
  • *sings*

    I've got a little list, and they'll none of them be missed;
    They'll none of them be missed, they'll none of them be missed...


    (With due acknowledgment to W S Gilbert)
  • RockyRoger wrote: »
    WTF have posters allowed Telford to derail what was a satisfyingly amusing Piffel thread? Won't they ever learn? Now it's about whether people like him. I repeat, please, please stop!

    There's not much we can do about it, save to ignore him, and carry on as if he didn't exist. Even then, he will soon derail the thread again.


  • orfeo wrote: »
    mousethief wrote: »
    If someone is gong through trauma they may be just as likely to be contentious on here. Either getting it out of their system or having little choice because it is now who they are. Didn't you find that with the pupils you taught?

    As I see it, you are making this a little personal. I could read your OP to Telford as being along the lines of trying to make him feel guilty if you had to stop posting. You seemed to think I was talking about you when I wrote about motivation. It is how I generally perceive it here. If that's wrong by others then I have no worries about that: it's how I see it. You've taken issue with others.

    You seem to be saying if someone is having a rough time it's okay for them to be shitty to us here, but it's not okay for us (who may or may not be having a rough time) to vent about it. A little one-sided isn't it?

    No I'm not saying it's ok - I'm saying that it happens. I'm not that bothered about the reacting/venting from one person, either. What does concern me is when one person piles in and others quickly join in the melee. It's like being in the playground seeing someone starting the kicking and joining in, partly because you want the approval of the person starting it all as much as you want to vent yourself. The joining in is the least attractive element of worrying opportunity.

    The joining in can also be seen as taking up the cudgels on someone else's behalf.

    It would be more accurate, on many occasions, to describe this process as a whole BUNCH of people thinking much the same thing, and the dam breaking when one of that bunch has finally had enough to actually say the thing that they're all thinking.

    Because that's just how human nature frequently works. Despite the portrayal sometimes of how everyone is just itching to be nasty, often what happens is that lots of people have been restraining themselves and trying to be nice.

    And yes, it's true, one person doing something gives others permission to also do it. When being angry is not the done thing, it's a lot easier to be angry once someone else has started to be publicly angry.

    But it's a complete myth that the first time someone says something, or in this case writes something, is also the first time that someone has thought it. Many's the time on the Ship when a considerable number of people have all thought that one Shipmate is being unreasonable and objectionable, but it takes some time before one of them finally decides that it's gone far enough to be a Hell call.

    I can certainly remember times when I've got to the point of deciding to take something to Hell, only to discover that someone else has had the same reaction to the same post or posts within, say, half a day before. The wonder of timezones and all that.

    So no. It's not at all like the playground. The fact that a number of people have the same opinion is not evidence of a mob. It's often evidence that it's an opinion widely shared by a lot of people.

    Very well put.
  • PigletPiglet All Saints Host, Circus Host
    *sings*

    I've got a little list, and they'll none of them be missed;
    They'll none of them be missed, they'll none of them be missed...


    (With due acknowledgment to W S Gilbert)
    You beat me to it! :mrgreen:
  • But I expect you would sing it more tunefully than I...
    :wink:
  • Remember - she's an alto. She can read music!
  • My point exactly...
    :wink:
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    RockyRoger wrote: »
    WTF have posters allowed Telford to derail what was a satisfyingly amusing Piffel thread? Won't they ever learn? Now it's about whether people like him. I repeat, please, please stop!

    There's not much we can do about it, save to ignore him, and carry on as if he didn't exist. Even then, he will soon derail the thread again.


    Just keep ignoring him, at least on the thread itself; after all, there's always this thread. Derailing only occurs if someone tries to pick him up. Then it's near impossible to get things back onto the rails.
  • That's the way to do it!!
  • Gee D wrote: »
    RockyRoger wrote: »
    WTF have posters allowed Telford to derail what was a satisfyingly amusing Piffel thread? Won't they ever learn? Now it's about whether people like him. I repeat, please, please stop!

    There's not much we can do about it, save to ignore him, and carry on as if he didn't exist. Even then, he will soon derail the thread again.


    Just keep ignoring him, at least on the thread itself; after all, there's always this thread. Derailing only occurs if someone tries to pick him up. Then it's near impossible to get things back onto the rails.

    That was my idea when I started this thread. Frustrations here, good discussion on the threads he (inadvertently or not) often derails.

    That was why I wanted him to come here - so that all the ‘you said, I said’ could be kept away from the interesting discussions. It hasn’t worked as well as it could have as he’s refused to engage here.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    RockyRoger wrote: »
    That's the way to do it!!

    Why do I immediately think of sausages and crocodiles
  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    Boogie wrote: »
    Gee D wrote: »
    RockyRoger wrote: »
    WTF have posters allowed Telford to derail what was a satisfyingly amusing Piffel thread? Won't they ever learn? Now it's about whether people like him. I repeat, please, please stop!

    There's not much we can do about it, save to ignore him, and carry on as if he didn't exist. Even then, he will soon derail the thread again.


    Just keep ignoring him, at least on the thread itself; after all, there's always this thread. Derailing only occurs if someone tries to pick him up. Then it's near impossible to get things back onto the rails.

    That was my idea when I started this thread. Frustrations here, good discussion on the threads he (inadvertently or not) often derails.

    That was why I wanted him to come here - so that all the ‘you said, I said’ could be kept away from the interesting discussions. It hasn’t worked as well as it could have as he’s refused to engage here.

    Thank you for starting it and hope your attempt is successful. On another thread I recently said to both Telford and another poster that they were derailing the thread itself by their sniping. It is a 2-way action; Telford throws in something provocative and another poster bites - but not so much the provocative comment as Telford. Off the thread goes.
  • An old Anglo-Saxon proverb springs to mind:
    "Never wrassle with a turd, whether you end above or below you are beshitted". I have made this one of my rules.

    Not that T is a turd (he posted a lovely joke in heaven), but either deliberately or provocatively, and despite kind an patient folk trying to explain to him, he appears not to have the slightest idea how ;rules' of an on-line forum is supposed to work.
    Whether he is liked or not is not the point, which is, can he argue his case (assuming there is one) logically? All the evidence is that he can't.

    One can cope with this sort of thing 'face to face' but not remotely on a forum. So he is best (and with least harm) ignored.
  • Telford's last two "offences" mentioned here are (1) disagreeing with an ideologically-motivated misrepresentation of a government policy and (2) saying that he thinks postal votes should be received on or before the election date in order to be counted.

    Wow. Clearly he is the antichrist.

    And oh no! Now he's disagreeing with you on the thread that's a constant fucking parade of unreasoning denigration and hatred of the UK Prime Minister! How dare he have an opinion that isn't in line with the mass groupthink! Burn the witch!

    Y'all need to open your fucking eyes and realise that the only reason you've got those rageboners for Telford is because he has the temerity to post right-wing opinions in the middle of your nice little lefty echo chamber. That such opinions can be described as provocative trolling without a hint of irony shows just how far this place has fallen.
  • RockyRoger wrote: »
    Whether he is liked or not is not the point, which is, can he argue his case (assuming there is one) logically? All the evidence is that he can't.

    Nor can a bunch of other posters here. But they're left-wing and thus agree with the groupthink, so nobody cares that they couldn't logic their way out of a paper bag.
  • DafydDafyd Shipmate
    edited November 2020
    Let me see if I understand Marvin's position: Marvin agrees that Telford is annoying and obstructive but thinks it's wrong to be annoyed with him unless we're also annoyed at equally annoying people who don't say things we disagree with?

    I think that is something of a counsel of superhuman perfection.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    Telford's last two "offences" mentioned here are (1) disagreeing with an ideologically-motivated misrepresentation of a government policy and (2) saying that he thinks postal votes should be received on or before the election date in order to be counted.

    Wow. Clearly he is the antichrist.

    And oh no! Now he's disagreeing with you on the thread that's a constant fucking parade of unreasoning denigration and hatred of the UK Prime Minister! How dare he have an opinion that isn't in line with the mass groupthink! Burn the witch!

    Y'all need to open your fucking eyes and realise that the only reason you've got those rageboners for Telford is because he has the temerity to post right-wing opinions in the middle of your nice little lefty echo chamber. That such opinions can be described as provocative trolling without a hint of irony shows just how far this place has fallen.

    Rubbish. In fact utter rubbish. I have tried to discuss with him but he doesn’t discuss. He makes statements and complains when someone doesn’t agree with him. It is not about his political affiliations, it is about his lack of interaction, his tendency to focus on him and not make a good argument.
    As an Evo I have had to stand up to a load of crap about Evos on this vessel for over 20 years. I have argued my point and acknowledged others. That is something Telford will not do.
  • Y'all need to open your fucking eyes and realise that the only reason you've got those rageboners for Telford is because he has the temerity to post right-wing opinions in the middle of your nice little lefty echo chamber. That such opinions can be described as provocative trolling without a hint of irony shows just how far this place has fallen.

    I think with time toleration towards him has decreased, to the point where the threshold at which he irritates is lower than it was. To start off with though most people were getting annoyed with his habit of entering threads outside Hell (where presumably rules are looser) and making very dogmatic statements without backing them up and insisting they were factual (and then often claiming he was right after all).

  • Telford's last two "offences" mentioned here are (1) disagreeing with an ideologically-motivated misrepresentation of a government policy and (2) saying that he thinks postal votes should be received on or before the election date in order to be counted.
    I don't recall anyone bringing the second of those to Hell. Point it out if you saw it and I didn't. A couple of us did point out the flaw in his argument (relating to the UK, because that's what we understand) that at present the time between when candidates have to have their paperwork in (and hence, the earliest ballot papers can be printed) and the date of the election is too short to guarantee that everyone who requested a postal ballot has the time to receive and return it. No one got angry or personal about that, we just pointed out the fact that if the intention is to give everyone the opportunity to vote then one of two timings need to change - either more time between close of candidates filing their paperwork and the election needs to be longer, or there needs to be acceptance of postal ballots arriving after the polls close.

    As for the first, that was in Hell anyway. And, it's always been the case that if you post in Hell you should put on your asbestos undies.

  • I suspect Marvin is feeling a bit grumpy today...
  • I suspect Marvin is feeling a bit grumpy today...

    As I recall, Marvin does Not Do Well with lockdown.
  • Ah yes - ISWYM.
    :wink:
  • It's not the views T expresses that frustrate, but that he does not back them up with reasoned argument, or even irony. If you go against the grain of a thread, you do need to give grounds for your 'opinions. But when challenged T goes into 'passive aggressive' mode and the tread becomes more about him than say, the egregious Johnson.




  • I don't recall anyone bringing the second of those to Hell. Point it out if you saw it and I didn't.

    KarlLB, Nov 8th, this thread.
  • Dafyd wrote: »
    Let me see if I understand Marvin's position: Marvin agrees that Telford is annoying and obstructive but thinks it's wrong to be annoyed with him unless we're also annoyed at equally annoying people who don't say things we disagree with?

    I think he's being treated worse because of which side of the political center he's on.
  • This is what @KarlLB said regarding postal votes:

    Aaaaand he's at it again wrt postal votes in Purg.

    @Telford - take a step back and observe what you're doing there, there's a good chap. This is exactly the sort of thing that gets people's backs up
    .

  • ...making very dogmatic statements without backing them up and insisting they were factual...

    Again, not something that's generally considered a problem when done by someone from the left of center.
  • I don't recall anyone bringing the second of those to Hell. Point it out if you saw it and I didn't.

    KarlLB, Nov 8th, this thread.

    Point of clarification - I brought here his consistent refusal to actually address the points being made (by IIRC @Alan Cresswell and @Leorning Cniht ), not the point itself.

  • I suspect Marvin is feeling a bit grumpy today...

    Yeah, there's no way I could possibly have a point to make, it must just be that I'm in a bad mood. You can just dismiss or ignore me and go on believing there's nothing wrong with anything you do.
  • Yes, that was why I quoted Karl - I meant to edit my post, but my PC decided to freeze yet again...I blame Trump...
  • I'm confused. Johnson's thread is now about Telford, and Telford's thread is about Marvin. Should I start a thread about Marvin so I can slag off Johnson?
  • ...making very dogmatic statements without backing them up and insisting they were factual...

    Again, not something that's generally considered a problem when done by someone from the left of center.

    This is just bollocks. The problem has never been Telford's politics but always his MO of posting unsupported assertions and then playing the victim when faced with even the mildest challenge or request to back up his positions.

    It's probably fair to say that each post is not just judged on its merits but there's a constant pattern of these writings that make any expectation of being given the benefit of the doubt ridiculous as no such doubt really exists.

    I have not, but am prepared to, link to examples of my engaging with Telford, all of which have been ignored or rebuffed.

    AFZ
  • ...making very dogmatic statements without backing them up and insisting they were factual...

    Again, not something that's generally considered a problem when done by someone from the left of center.

    There are a number of people who regular post links to back up their arguments, and who respond to questions by people like @Dave W, I have not seen Telford respond in anything like the same way.
  • No indeed. If anything, you just get a stupid, obtuse, and irritating non sequitur. He only does it to annoy, because he knows it teases.

    At present, the Shropshire Somnifacient (aka the Salopian Pot-Plant) is derailing the Foreign Aid thread in Purgatory. As usual, people are being incredibly patient, but it is, as I think @KarlLB first suggested, like trying to play chess with a particularly incontinent pigeon...
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    No indeed. If anything, you just get a stupid, obtuse, and irritating non sequitur. He only does it to annoy, because he knows it teases.

    And he can thoroughly enjoy the pepper when he pleases?
This discussion has been closed.