Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@sceptical guy wrote:
Is it me, or is this thread becoming distinctly nasty, if not downright seedy?
Don’t answer that, not even with bad puns on seedy, please
It’s not up to our normal high standards, it’s true. I think we should all have a good long hard look at ourselves in the mirror……..
……..that shock should immediately banish any sexual thoughts for a few of us.
I’m off to “chastise” myself rather severely. I deserve it.
:oops:
@wordsworth60 wrote:
Kenty’s far too discerning to fall for my wiles, ML, so I resort to the comforts of the single malt . . . . .
I’ll join you for that single malt later.
8)
@sceptical guy wrote:
@mrs_teapot wrote:
How terrible for Lord McAlpine…even the guy who made the allegations now says he is wrongly accused…. problem is though mud sticks and though he was not the abuser and there is no doubt he wasn’t…… some will say there is no smoke without fire…. what a nightmare!
Shame on Newsnight!
Well, the BBC have got themselves into a total mess, haven’t they? How the Jimmy Savile affair is just snowballing!
I remember when Newsnight was the top drawer of BBC reporting.
McAlpine can look after himself, unlike many others, but this Rupert Murdoch journalism backfired on Murdoch after years of his practise on ordinary people without any money to fight back, and nobody seems to have thought why.
A cheap, dirty laugh at the expense of rich bods can end up throwing dirt over the people who are doing the laughing.
Checking on sources, taking care with your accuracy, basic decency and honesty (I remember when those words didn’t sound old-fashioned) are standards which have to apply to everybody, even people we don’t like.
No they are standards we insist on in the BBC but let the rest of the media get away with.
Weren’t we just criticising them for not rushing to report paedophile allegations?
Seems the rest of the press and broadcast media can do what they want, but the BBC is expected to be impeccable.
:?
Sometimes life is like having a book on feng shui and just not being able to find the right place to put it.
@j_in_france wrote:
@rubyred wrote:
yeah !! anyone with a modicum of common sense would have realised..
nah i wont even explain. will leave YOU forever the buffoon!
au revoir Sir Prancelot !
jen jen/panda skype me soooon..
/poofily waves. xx
so a husband and wife having sex together is wrong?
but three women chatting on skype each wanking is ok?
Depends what floats your boat…….
Really?
You don’t get irony, sarcasm or comic exaggeration?
Or have you just failed your troll exam?
@j_in_france wrote:
so why does it not quote the post you quoted/?
Cos life’s too short, and most people who read the Boards do what you don’t, and keep up with things.
:wink:
@j_in_france wrote:
@panda12 wrote:
@j_in_france wrote:
personally I find this vote sad even when wrapped up in terms of not being racist
a persons colour really does not matter as to who the person is
This thread is pure tongue in cheek and stems from this one:
https://www.justchat.co.uk/boards/viewtopic.php?t=28192
which, before you get on your Wine Box and start preaching, is also tongue in cheek.
so why does it not quote the post you quoted/?
Now don’t take this the wrong way, but are you really trying not to get the point of every single thread or to completely misjudge its dynamic, including the ones you start?
And while I am risking being slightly harsh, perhaps the role of board pedant, in terms of absolutely licketysplit inter thread posting protocol, might be the wrong role for you, given my previous statement.
Apologies for the formal language but I wanted to avoid the impression that I was getting at you.
@j_in_france wrote:
personally I find this vote sad even when wrapped up in terms of not being racist
a persons colour really does not matter as to who the person is
-
1 Take head
2 Place in hands
3 Sigh
4 Repeat as necessary
@kent f OBE wrote:
I’ll let you off if you gis a flash :lol:
:shock:
I’m going to cry now.
