Diynot summer party

[Highway Man]

I would immediately pee on them!

So would I

 

[Koolpc]

You first.

Ironically I can see King Billy liked your post. It’s a bit sad when you get your likes up with another user name.

I think they could be the same person as they always agree with each others posts etc etc....

Anyway, I am getting ready for the diynot Christmas party. I am burying some juicy marrow bones for everyone!!!

 

[Koolpc]

Can we get back to the 2026 diynot special summer barbeque please?

 

[Highway Man]

So just being wrong makes someone a troll? Given Rule 1a you must think that it's actually against the rules to be wrong.

And is that objectively wrong, i.e. provably so by reference to established facts, or subjectively wrong, i.e. just in your opinion?

If the former, can you quote any authoritative source which gives "being factually wrong" as a definition of "troll"?

If the latter, what makes you the arbiter of who is right, and who is wrong, and gives you the right to brand someone a troll just because you disagree with them?

And what's the essential difference between a "troll" being someone you disagree with and a "troll" being someone who disagrees with you, a definition you rejected earlier?

I think you have dragged this out for long enough now. we get your point but it is becoming too much. Dec27 has given you his answers and best leave it there now. I think fair is fair and it is becoming repetitive.

 

[pete01]

So just being wrong makes someone a troll? Given Rule 1a you must think that it's actually against the rules to be wrong.

And is that objectively wrong, i.e. provably so by reference to established facts, or subjectively wrong, i.e. just in your opinion?

If the former, can you quote any authoritative source which gives "being factually wrong" as a definition of "troll"?

If the latter, what makes you the arbiter of who is right, and who is wrong, and gives you the right to brand someone a troll just because you disagree with them?

And what's the essential difference between a "troll" being someone you disagree with and a "troll" being someone who disagrees with you, a definition you rejected earlier?

Jesus wept mate has someone hit a nerve? Go to the fridge grab a beer and down it

 

[Highway Man]

It shouldn't be, not if you are going to accuse people of it.

And if it is impossible to explain then you have no definition to justify the accusation, and it becomes just groundless abuse.




I suggest that what you find difficult to deal with is my relentless insistence on the vital importance of truth, and facts, and evidence. And I make no apologies for being relentless in my pursuit of those and my demands that people use them to justify claims which they make.




But you don't know what the word means.




And would the electorate have any idea of what the word means?

OMG

 

[morqthana]

I think you have dragged this out for long enough now. we get your point but it is becoming too much. Dec27 has given you his answers and best leave it there now. I think fair is fair and it is becoming repetitive.

How about this:

I will never again ask someone to explain what they mean by"troll", with reference to an authoritative definition, and to show , using logic and reasoning, how what I wrote was deliberately inflammatory, irrelevant, or offensive, and done to provoke emotional reactions, start arguments, or get attention, if I am never again accused of trolling.

 

[Highway Man]

Another thread wrecked.

 

[Brigadier]

Another thread wrecked.

From the outset.

The first post was trolling and, like giddy schoolkids, the same old "mates" joined in with gusto.

 

[Highway Man]

From the outset.

The first post was trolling and, like giddy schoolkids, the same old "mates" joined in with gusto.

Bantz innit. Plenty of other threads to have a moan or complain about the world without having to be a killjoy on every thread

 

[Highway Man]

If you're looking for who's responsible for that, you've got 2 types of candidate.

1) Those who bully and insult people just because they don't like what they say.

2) Those on the receiving end of such abuse who refuse to sit quietly and meekly allowing it to go unchallenged.

Which do you think is morally more right?

but nobody is bullying

 

[noseall]

From the outset.

The first post was trolling and, like giddy schoolkids, the same old "mates" joined in with gusto.

It's been the same since the recent batch of trolls joined. There is a herd of them now intent on fugging up every thread. We even have one contaminating the building forum FFS.

Tiresome. Low intelligence. Boring.