I'm waiting for your LOL!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
BritGAF |OT5| Superb Birds, Absurd Turds and Disturbed Nerds
- Thread starter Mikeside
- Start date
- Status
I'm waiting for your LOL!
I'm not racist, I just don't like black people, LOL!
That's no laughing matter. :|
You missed the 'but'. I'm not racist, BUT.
You are aware that was a [rather poor] impersonation of roundabout, right?
Homophobia and sexism?
show me your skeleton
Member
yeah, this thread is nose diving fast.
pull up people! UP!
roundabout
Banned
I didn't say anything about black people, man. I'm talking about economic migration. And ethics in games journalism LOL!
JonathanEx
Member
Care to back up that £1000 each thing with sparkies you're on about? There was a Mail front page this week about bricklayers on £1000 a week (based on a £200 day rate), is that what you mean?
Oh and that last line is absolutely horrible and I'd feel terrible if no-one properly called you out on it.
You mean when you were free to ogle??
You started this, Bowen. Now end it.
(In threatening villain voice)
roundabout
Banned
Oh yeah I meant bricklayers LOL!
cjp
Junior Member
Any valid concerns about immigration you might allude to, or rather grasp at, are drowned out by your ignorant and blatant racist statements like "I don't want my future child going to school with people called Pavel and Alena."
Please don't equate having concerns about immigration to bigotry and racism.
Edit: Perhaps it's better to sideline these discussions over to UKPoliGAF.
roundabout
Banned
Yeah that was wrong of me, I perhaps got on a rhetorical high horse. I'm sorry about that.
But I am very concerned by immigration and so are a lot of people I speak to, and we deserve to have our voices listened to as well. There is a tendency to brush these concerns over to the side because of "LOL racism" but if a good chunk of the country are thinking one thing then that's democracy, you can't argue with it.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Hey come on now, I'm sure a few other dudes got some cheap thrills from the pics too. Jed was often very vocal about his appreciation, God rest his soul.
I may be a pervert, but I'm not a self-serving pervert.
Psychotext
Member
It's all because of the loss of the beautiful women thread years ago. We had an outlet! (There was a men thread too, equality!)
Owen listen to this creamy biscuit of a compilation. Tall Black Guy presents Tempo Dreams Vol. 1
dapperbandit
Banned
I think some of your sarcasm detectors are defective.
Also I was mid way through typing out a carefully worded but interesting post on the subject of the foreign hordes but I don't know whether or not to persevere.
Also I was mid way through typing out a carefully worded but interesting post on the subject of the foreign hordes but I don't know whether or not to persevere.
I would hate my kid hanging out with Pavel also
what a dick he was in Metro: Last Light
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Must not... air... dirty laundry...
JonathanEx
Member
Ah then that story isn't a great argument then. It was "£1000 a week" bricklayers, apparently double the day rate, for ones from other countries. That's hardly cheap EU labour, that's more expensive EU labour.
PLUS it's a story from the Mail ¯\_(ツ
_/¯Psychotext
Member
Found out a friend of mine's name was actually Stanislav when he died recently. He'd been calling himself Stan for like... 40 years. Filthy lying foreign scum!
dapperbandit
Banned
Ha. I already did a wash today, ye shall find no national-socialist knickers in my possession.
But really, I've got the reply box open in a seperate window, still editing my post like a motherfucker.
Let it crash and burn, it's almost time for the next one anyway.
Discussion is good. And I say this as a fully-paid up triple minority.
Maybe roundabout needs to just add a few more LOLs!
This is a tense situation.
Especially as I can't connect to the Titanfall servers. Grrr.
Have you played Titanfall yet? Don't recall you mentioning.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Genuinely can't tell if roundabout is trolling or not. I mean, Alena can be a celtic name...
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
CHEEZMO;142702123 said:
I thought you were an Anarcho-Communist? Isn't that as far left as you can get?
There's always... Darku Soulsu!
zomgbbqftw
Banned
So stupid people then.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Have you met many academics? I deal with them on a daily basis and lolno.
NinjaBoiX
Member
Sweet Pete, I'll give it a listen.
Yeh, I have a bit of contact with them as an undergraduate and a member and organiser of a few student societies, but nowhere near as much as postgraduates do. Since my uni is usually involved in policymaking, I think since I have started university, I have been sweetened by the idea of academic elitism and how the general public cannot and will not comprehend academic, philosophical, social and economic ideas without sufficient training until a revolution in information symmetry occurs.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
I understand your logical approach and it is very tempting at points. But academia is either incredibly conservative or extremely liberal. I know very sensible, intelligent academics who are adamant ukippers (one of whom is gay, another an immigrant). Many are Oxbridge-y elites and don't get me started on the economists/business school people...
It's true in academia, especially within the social sciences and economics, suffer from objectivity problems; a vast number of theories that academics ignore due to their background, training and biases and cycles through paradigms of thought in their discipline. I don't want a true metrocracy, no matter how attractive it is and that it would be an extreme violation of freedom of speech, which I am big supporter of and how it empowers us to change and debate problematic situations within institutions. I'm more focused on changing the incentives of the policy decision makers in favour of logical debate instead of political biases. Empowering the academics instead of weakening them. There are a few groups in society that I envy and celebrate. Doctors, researchers, academics, entrepreneurs and human rights activists.
EDIT: For those UKIP supporters, attended a small seminar by the former head of UKIP who's attends my university. He called Farage a dimwit. Nothing wrong with supporting UKIP or any party unless it reduces the rights of certain demographics of society, thought that may be quite interesting.
Yes, a few times now. After about an hour of game-time, I really like it. I wanted a new podcast / radio game since Destiny's becoming more sinister.
that's my main course! I have to plan that around E as it's so unpausable. But she's watching TV now so I've got until 10pm. To fail repeatedly.
What do the economists / business school people say?
dapperbandit
Banned
I'm looking forward to the Brand/Farage Question Time Extravaganza myself.
But really, immigration is a fun issue to talk about. The "i-word" makes people absurdly nervous of the taboo because they are desperately afraid of appearing to be the "r-word." So it's got to the stage where anybody who brings up the i-word is most certainly an r-word and so only r-words would be concerned with it.
It's also really common that people absolutely fail to distinguish between different kinds of migration. Legal migration of skilled/unskilled labour, illegal migration and asylum are different things that should be treated differently. If a person is fleeing genuine persecution then yes, we should help shelter them, for example, when Idi Amin expelled Asians from Uganda in 1972 we were right to help.
Legal immigration is a mixed bag. Of course skilled labour is highly valuable, especially health workers. Nobody wants less doctors. You occasionally hear that argument that doctors and nurses and other professionals from developing countries should stay where they are and help their fellow countrymen, that's its unfair for Britain to hoover up foreign talent. I see the logic in that, but I'm always suspicious that the argument is being used as a cover for prejudice.
When it comes to un-skilled labour you get the other argument, that the unemployed in this country are too lazy to do those jobs so we need migrants there. I'm really not fond of sweeping generalizations when it comes to millions of people.
Essentially my stance on the subject is this: I wish people saw it more as a numbers issue and left the emotion at the door. But at the same time, statistics are used by all sides to persuade the public one way or another. I want to see a set of reliable, agenda-free reports that give us the hard maths on a few things. Like how much wealth immigrants bring to the country, whether current trends are sustainable etc. I feel like that's not something that's ever going to happen though. Every face in the debate has a study they can refer to which supports their argument. And of course you can't trust a politician not to omit or misconstrue figures, nor you can you 100% trust that the study is unbiased or reliable.
-
This has taken far too long. Turns out I'm more self conscious about potentially "getting it wrong" than I thought. Sorry if I was a tease and had people waiting for my post.
But really, immigration is a fun issue to talk about. The "i-word" makes people absurdly nervous of the taboo because they are desperately afraid of appearing to be the "r-word." So it's got to the stage where anybody who brings up the i-word is most certainly an r-word and so only r-words would be concerned with it.
It's also really common that people absolutely fail to distinguish between different kinds of migration. Legal migration of skilled/unskilled labour, illegal migration and asylum are different things that should be treated differently. If a person is fleeing genuine persecution then yes, we should help shelter them, for example, when Idi Amin expelled Asians from Uganda in 1972 we were right to help.
Legal immigration is a mixed bag. Of course skilled labour is highly valuable, especially health workers. Nobody wants less doctors. You occasionally hear that argument that doctors and nurses and other professionals from developing countries should stay where they are and help their fellow countrymen, that's its unfair for Britain to hoover up foreign talent. I see the logic in that, but I'm always suspicious that the argument is being used as a cover for prejudice.
When it comes to un-skilled labour you get the other argument, that the unemployed in this country are too lazy to do those jobs so we need migrants there. I'm really not fond of sweeping generalizations when it comes to millions of people.
Essentially my stance on the subject is this: I wish people saw it more as a numbers issue and left the emotion at the door. But at the same time, statistics are used by all sides to persuade the public one way or another. I want to see a set of reliable, agenda-free reports that give us the hard maths on a few things. Like how much wealth immigrants bring to the country, whether current trends are sustainable etc. I feel like that's not something that's ever going to happen though. Every face in the debate has a study they can refer to which supports their argument. And of course you can't trust a politician not to omit or misconstrue figures, nor you can you 100% trust that the study is unbiased or reliable.
-
This has taken far too long. Turns out I'm more self conscious about potentially "getting it wrong" than I thought. Sorry if I was a tease and had people waiting for my post.
Cool, it's a really neat game but for whatever reason I never really got into it. Apparently the pc community is dead now so I uninstalled it.
War Peaceman
You're a big guy.
Rambling post incoming
Nothing wrong with political biases, by the way. Except when they aren't yours .
What you are saying is interesting but also meaningless. That sounds harsh. How do you empower these groups? (my answer: elect them) How do you change the incentives of policy decision makers in favour of logical debate? The Lords is probably a better place for debate than the Commons, which is a playground, but is that because of age or because of no term limits?
The former head of UKIP (Sked, I'm guessing, though Robert Kilroy-Silk shouldn't be forgotten).... he's a solid historian and fairly decent man. He despises UKIP though, partly out of bitterness, but also hates their xenophobia.
Business academics tend to speak in a string of acronyms punctuated with conjunctions. They and economists have a very bad habit of being too rigid in their thinking, seeing reason where there is none, trying to objectively analyse far too much... etc. Libertarianism is very common in this area as is a distinct lack of empathy. Obviously I'm generalising!
I have a lot of respect for these two fields (I nick from them all the time) but democracy is best, there is just a severe lack of democratic action by the electorate. People used to riot as a means of expressing political discontent (look up food riots) but politicians are largely unaccountable. I don't think having academics or doctors or whomever in charge will make for better decision-making in the long term. They are as vulnerable to idiocy, corruption, laziness and obliviousness as anyone else.
The lawyers are wonderful of course
Nothing wrong with political biases, by the way. Except when they aren't yours
.What you are saying is interesting but also meaningless. That sounds harsh. How do you empower these groups? (my answer: elect them) How do you change the incentives of policy decision makers in favour of logical debate? The Lords is probably a better place for debate than the Commons, which is a playground, but is that because of age or because of no term limits?
The former head of UKIP (Sked, I'm guessing, though Robert Kilroy-Silk shouldn't be forgotten).... he's a solid historian and fairly decent man. He despises UKIP though, partly out of bitterness, but also hates their xenophobia.
Business academics tend to speak in a string of acronyms punctuated with conjunctions. They and economists have a very bad habit of being too rigid in their thinking, seeing reason where there is none, trying to objectively analyse far too much... etc. Libertarianism is very common in this area as is a distinct lack of empathy. Obviously I'm generalising!
I have a lot of respect for these two fields (I nick from them all the time) but democracy is best, there is just a severe lack of democratic action by the electorate. People used to riot as a means of expressing political discontent (look up food riots) but politicians are largely unaccountable. I don't think having academics or doctors or whomever in charge will make for better decision-making in the long term. They are as vulnerable to idiocy, corruption, laziness and obliviousness as anyone else.
The lawyers are wonderful of course
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked