Play Nice Random Chat Thread: Episode III

[Sopwiths North]

Sorry, don't agree. I haven't seen anything racist or sexist in his posts. I have never seen him attack Ben Brown and I have never seen him say that 'women have no right to play AFL football'. I have never seen any hate speech. They're pretty nasty labels to throw at someone. If you have seen those things perhaps you could repost them? This is big footy not some alt right website. I don't think he poses a risk to national security. So to compare him to some white supremacist nutter is just way over the top, for me.

I don’t know how you can have read this forum and not gleaned Snake’s opinion on AFLW, but for a summation of it go check out his post in the AFLW 2019 thread where King Corey asks him “Is your grievance with AFLW as an entity or North’s involvement in it?”, to which Snake replies “The entity completely.” Post # 1,105 in that thread, to be specific, but there’s been plenty more condemnation from him across multiple threads for quite some time now.

And then there was the marathon of posts when he obsessively held the view that Maj was only getting games based on the colour of his skin.

And TOD's done my legwork around BBB (thank you TOD!)

But come on kaboom, page 47 of this very thread, his post about The Huddle (#1,159), you really don’t see it? Okay, well, let’s recap: Here are some of the things that Snake finds, and I quote, “****ing disturbing” for our club to espouse and be part of:

“-Take a stand against hate and racism
-Help prevent radicalisation and violent extremism
-Build resilience to prevent hate speech
-Increase the understanding of marginalised people
-Increase the inclusion of marginalised people”

And no, I absolutely did not compare him to a “white supremacist nutter”. My point was that the kind of horrific act of white supremacist terrorism that happened in Christchurch is the culmination of a society that allows hate speech at more mundane low levels, or veiled as free speech. Hatred is like a fire. It grows and consumes everyone, if you allow it.

 

[Sopwiths North]

Apparently nobody reads manifestos, as whats currently happening in this thread is just playing right into his hands.

I know what you're trying to say Billy, but there's a difference. You call out hate speech and racism at the veiled low levels whenever and wherever it happens, in the hopes that it doesn't gain oxygen and grow in people. You nip it in the bud. You work towards a society of zero tolerance of it that way.

It's the people who have already crossed the line and turned their hatred into acts of violence that you put on ignore socially in the aftermath. And if you see them escalating beforehand, it's your duty as a human being to tell someone who can hopefully stop them.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Sorry, don't agree. I haven't seen anything racist or sexist in his posts. I have never seen him attack Ben Brown and I have never seen him say that 'women have no right to play AFL football'. I have never seen any hate speech. They're pretty nasty labels to throw at someone. If you have seen those things perhaps you could repost them? This is big footy not some alt right website. I don't think he poses a risk to national security. So to compare him to some white supremacist nutter is just way over the top, for me.

You're not dealing with a rational person here, and I don't lose sleep over the rantings of fruit loops.

Back to Marley, great to see he will make round 1. We'll need him to lock down Walters when he's forward.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Tbh he’s always on point and has good content, but I only get to have a squiz at BigFooty on the sly, so I never get to read his posts in full

I can't see the point in utilising 4000 words to communicate a concept that requires only 40.

Sometimes when you grind through Tas's posts you can get some informative material, but when it's not that informative you quickly drop off even putting in the effort to read it. I tend to only read his NMFC/AFL administrative commentaries now.

 

[Firestarter]

I can't see the point in utilising 4000 words to communicate a concept that requires only 40.

Sometimes you need something to help you on the can.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Sometimes you need something to help you on the can.

During or afterwards?

I tend to find that the resident virtue signaller (Sopwith North/Kimbo/hootini/Barassi Scowl/TOD etc,) printouts have the best absorbency.

 

[Val Keating]

I can't see the point in utilising 4000 words to communicate a concept that requires only 40.

Sometimes when you grind through Tas's posts you can get some informative material, but when it's not that informative you quickly drop off even putting in the effort to read it. I tend to only read his NMFC/AFL administrative commentaries now.

If you think that’s bad you should see the texts I get off my sisters when they’ve got the shits. I usually don’t read them and just respond with the

 

[Val Keating]

Firestarter are you watching Sixers v bucks?

 

[Firestarter]

Firestarter are you watching Sixers v bucks?

On Twitter yeah.

 

[Val Keating]

On Twitter yeah.

Waiting for the Sixers to blow it

 

[Sopwiths North]

You're not dealing with a rational person here, and I don't lose sleep over the rantings of fruit loops.

Back to Marley, great to see he will make round 1. We'll need him to lock down Walters when he's forward.

Hey, that's great Snake, cos I don't lie awake at night thinking about you either, so at least we agree on something. Well, that, and yes it WILL be great to see Marley back!

 

[Firestarter]

Waiting for the Sixers to blow it

Damnit

 

[Tas]

I can't see the point in utilising 4000 words to communicate a concept that requires only 40.

Sometimes when you grind through Tas's posts you can get some informative material, but when it's not that informative you quickly drop off even putting in the effort to read it. I tend to only read his NMFC/AFL administrative commentaries now.

Mate, your cowardly sniping is pathetic. Is that short enough for you?

 

[ferball]

cheers Ferball. If you hear people saying crap like that you may like to point out to them in a non violent way (don't need any more of that) that some of the victims were children..Lets see if they could justify that.

I was planning on it actually.

 

[ferball]

Motorbikes tend to ram that point home very forcefully mate.

A good mate of mine hit a truck at about 150km/hr last year.

Some people are always gonna go that way. His mum wouldn't let asked him not to get a motorbike licence. She died a few years ago and he got one.

Now he's dead at 44 leaving a massive hole in a lot of people's lives. He didn't get the licence cos he knew himself well enough to know he would probably have broken his mum's heart. He was a champion motocross and enduro rider and speedway driver and had built a track you can see on google earth on his place. So he got his licence after his mum died and all his kids turned 18. As ****ed as it is he was always gonna die that way. In a car or on a bike. Some people just like to push the envelope.

The good thing is he never took anyone with him.

 

[King Corey]

Have you ever watched a cat eat a piece of KFC? Some experience

I find watching a human eat a piece of KFC disturbing enough.

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

I find watching a human eat a piece of KFC disturbing enough.

I told you to stay away from Chaddy food court.

 

[Mav]

I find watching a human eat a piece of KFC disturbing enough.

yeah, I try and avoid mirrors when I have a hangover.

 

[Kimbo]

My point was that the kind of horrific act of white supremacist terrorism that happened in Christchurch is the culmination of a society that allows hate speech at more mundane low levels, or veiled as free speech. Hatred is like a fire. It grows and consumes everyone, if you allow it.

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. ...We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant." Karl Popper

Let's stay on topic from hereon.

Perhaps more nipping in the bud, rather than acceptance of such intolerance, would be good then. If for no other reason than certain comments aren't 'on topic.' stern look

 

[Groin guru]

Thank you to everyone for allowing me to dodge and talk my way out of the bind I was in. I managed to back track so successfully that I even managed to avoid saying anything negative towards AOC. In doing so I keep the peace with those that value my opinion. Look out for my next edition of 'selective critiquing'

 

[kangaspurs]

Kudos to you both for grasping my point, and thank you for restating it in simple(r) terms in the hope of achieving some clarity here. Obviously, the 180 is important because it potentially gives rise to a degree of cynicism around the notions of motivation, intent, sincerity, integrity, opportunism, etc.

As you guys have duly noted.

And of course, as AOC's path to political notoriety didn't involve any kind of midstream ideological backflip, she quite clearly doesn't fit the 'Steps 1-4' criteria outlined in my original post. Therefore, in this particular instance, she is irrelevant to the original point being made.

I mean, GG has a point. Change a few words around in War and Peace and you have The Adventures of Captain Underpants. They're both books after all, just as AOC and Owens are female humans. Surprised you didn't see that, mate.

During or afterwards?

I tend to find that the resident virtue signaller (Sopwith North/Kimbo/hootini/Barassi Scowl/TOD etc,) printouts have the best absorbency.

Kind of insulted I wasn't included in those parenthesis tbh.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Mate, your cowardly sniping is pathetic. Is that short enough for you?

That's much better (although if calling you long winded gets you upset, I'd hate to see what an actual critique would do to you).

 

[kangaspurs]

Very debatable and Iraq is one example.

The 1999 figures are disputed, academically.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/29225933/

Plus, the Venezuelans were rummaging through rubbish for food before any USA sanctions.

Weaponised trade is the new way of warfare. Our role in any American war against China will be distant blockade via the malacca straits and East Indian Ocean.

Anyway, I do agree that sanctions and economic blockades have a measure of evil about them, especially if you think of the example of the British blockade against Germany in the First World War, which killed hundreds of thousands, but helped end the war by fueling the collapse of Germany's home front, which saved more lives in the long-term. They morality of sanctions and blockades is debatable, but there are many different types of strong and weak economic sanctions and blockades, and we have come a long way since 1914-18 and even 1991-2003.

Economic sanctions are ultimately intended to stop a greater evil.

Interesting piece. A lot of what I've read about those times in Iraq are anecdotal stories from people who lived through it.

As for your final sentence. I mean, that may be the case, but at what cost? And are there even any hard evidence in recent times that sanctions actually work without causing mass suffering?

 

[Kangaroos4eva]

Interesting piece. A lot of what I've read about those times in Iraq are anecdotal stories from people who lived through it.

As for your final sentence. I mean, that may be the case, but at what cost? And are there even any hard evidence in recent times that sanctions actually work without causing mass suffering?

Debatable, some might argue that North Korea's nuclear ambitions were halted by sanctions and generated long-term pressure which brought NK to the peace table.


Have a read and decide for yourself.
https://books.google.com.au/books?i...DAA#v=onepage&q=defence usa sanctions&f=false

 

[tazaa]

While I harbour intense suspicion of people who claim free speech to disguise racist and discriminatory behavior, I don't believe in censoring hate speech. It pains me to say this as a member of the African, muslim and immigrant community, but I will go so far as to say that we need to even protect hate speech.

The reason I say this is because I believe that censorship is a cure that is worse than the disease.

Worse than hate speeches potential to harm individuals and society as a whole, is the government's potential to inflict more harm by enforcing "hate speech" laws.

I'm of the firm opinion that we have undercover facists, racists and islamophobes in government who would love nothing more than to use such laws to silence dissenting views and disempowered groups.

That been said, violent and discremonatory conduct must be swiftly and harshly punished.

But speech conveying discriminatory and hateful ideas should be rebutted.......and here is my problem with Australia's politicians and media outlets.

Instead of rebutting such hateful and discremonatory ideas, they are taken advantage of for further gain by politicians and allowed to flourish with little to no rebuttle by media outlets.

Infact, not only are proponents of hate speech allowed to flourish, media outlets are known to select weak debators to represent the sensible opposing views.

This "rigging" distorts the debate and allows hateful speech to fester with no strong and credible rebuttle leading to the proponents of such ideas the false sense of credibility.

As much as it hurts me to see people who look like my father, mother, sisters and brothers executed in cold blood (yes I saw the murderers live feed) I do not believe in censorship of hateful speech.

I believe censorship of hate speech will only increase intergroup distrust and discrimination. Instead, hate speech should be confronted with a strong and direct rebuttle and not pandered to by politicians looking to score political points or rigged by media outlets to sell a story.


Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

The issue is MSM and its bias with the Murdochracy that runs todays news and social media platforms
Politician get free reign and the MSM runs with it

I refer you to this article below
http://theconversation.com/racist-reporting-still-rife-in-australian-media-88957

Half of all race-related opinion pieces in the Australian mainstream media are likely to contravene industry codes of conduct on racism.
In research released this week, the Who Watches the Media report found that of 124 race-related opinion pieces published between January and July this year, 62 were potentially in breach of one or more industry codes of conduct, because of racist content.
Despite multiple industry codes of conduct stipulating fair race-related reporting, racist reporting is a weekly phenomenon in Australia’s mainstream media.
We define racism as unjust covert or overt behaviour towards a person or a group on the basis of their racial background. This might be perpetrated by a person, a group, an organisation, or a system.
The research, conducted by not-for-profit group All Together Now and the University of Technology Sydney, focused on opinion-based pieces in the eight Australian newspapers and current affairs programs with the largest audiences, as determined by ratings agencies.
We found that negative race-related reports were most commonly published in News Corp publications. The Daily Telegraph, The Australian and Herald Sun were responsible for the most negative pieces in the press. A Current Affair was the most negative among the broadcast media.
Chart 1: Number of race-related stories by outlet and type of reporting

Author supplied
Muslims were mentioned in more than half of the opinion pieces, and more than twice as many times as any other single group mentioned (see chart 2).
Chart 2: Number of race-related stories by outlet and ethnic minority group

Author supplied
Muslims were portrayed more negatively than the other minority groups (see chart 3), with 63% of reports about Muslims framed negatively. These pieces often conflated Muslims with terrorism. For example, reports used terrorist attacks in the UK to question accepting Muslim refugees and immigrants to Australia.
This was a recurring theme in race-based opinion pieces over the study period. In contrast, there were more positive than negative stories about Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders.
Chart 3: Number of stories by ethnic minority group and type of reporting

Author supplied
Negative commentary about minority groups has lasting impacts in the community. An op-ed in the New York Times recently highlighted the impact that racism in the media has on individuals. It explained:

…racism doesn’t have to be experienced in person to affect our health — taking it in the form of news coverage is likely to have similar effects.​

The noted effects include elevated blood pressure, long after television scenes are over. Racism is literally making us sick.
Note also that given the lack of cultural diversity among opinion-makers, particularly on television, social commentators are largely talking about groups to which they do not belong. According to the 2016-20 PwC Media Outlook report, the average media employee is 27, Caucasian and male, which does not reflect the current population diversity of Australia.
This creates a strong argument for increasing the cultural diversity of all media agencies to help minimise the number of individuals or groups being negatively depicted in race-related reports.
Our research echoes the findings of the UN expert panel on racial discrimination, which reported last week that racist media debate was on the rise in Australia. The UN recommended the Australian media “put an end to racist hate speech” in print and online, and adopt a “code of good conduct” with provisions to ban racism.
Our report makes urgent recommendations to strengthen media regulations in relation to race-based reporting, to support journalists to discuss race sensitively, and to continue media monitoring.
While media regulations enable audiences to make complaints about racism in the media, under some codes, audiences have only 30 days to do so. The research report recommends that this deadline be removed to allow audiences to make complaints about racist media content at any time. It also calls for the definition of racism be broadened in the codes of conduct to include covert forms of racism. Covert racism includes subtle stereotyping, such as the repeated depiction of Muslim women with dark veils, implying secrecy and provoking suspicion.

News agencies need to do more to help journalists address race issues responsibly. They can do this by providing training, recruiting more journalists of colour, and ensuring that their editorial policies are racially aware.
The media are meant to hold up a mirror to society. When it comes to race-related reporting, we need a more accurate portrayal of the successes of Australian multiculturalism.
Priscilla Brice and Deliana Iacoban from All Together Now, a not-for-profit group working to combat racism, also contributed to this article.



Something needs to be done as Fridays events changed the rules forever
We cant sit by and do nothing any longer