Caroline Flack - RIP

[Bright Young Thing]

Mod Notice



Okay, thread moderated and many posts deleted. We have taken the decision not to re-open the thread as the subject has run its course.



Bright Young Thing.

[Bright Young Thing]

Thread closed for moderation

[DeppityDawg]

Again you fail to answer the issue, preferring to insult the person you communicate with even when it is pointed out in the post you respond to. One would normally conclude you do this because you have not the guts to tell the truth, which is that you can't answer my point with reasonable argument. This is so vacuous.



Lets make a guess at this though. Perhaps she claimed PTSD to wriggle her way out of that legal dispute. It's the kind of sh*t lawyers come out with. Sir, my client can not possible respond to you as she has PTSD.

I'll insult you everyday if necessary, because the word idiot singularly fails to do you justice. You've turned what was a reasoned discussion about social media and public attitudes into a personal attack on Caroline Flack with misogynistic comments yet AGAIN -  this is what you wrote -  "Yea but then they don't spend so much money on makeup and hair" What possible value to the conversation is this, and what "point" were you making, other than to PROVE yet again that you are a narrow minded, misogynistic bore.



You don't have a point for anyone to answer, you came onto this thread to indulge yourself again, and if anyone is vacuous its you, you fecking drone.

[Nick]

PTSD my arse!!!



Was the stress induced by her favourite nail varnish temporarily out of stock?



PTSE is from those who have been on the front line in bloody wars and seen their mates blown to smitheries.

And that ladies and gents is how you prove you're a cock. Can't even comprehend simple sentences...But, managed to get his usual misogyny in.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Insult? No just pointing out the truth

So you don't back down but think you can win your argument with zero reason and copious amounts of personal attack. This just reinforces the truth of the observation I made previously.

it's not a question of guts but whether it's worth the effort,clearly it isn't.



Were I alone in pointing out your flaws your certainly mysoginistic bent then you might have a point,however almost to a man and woman you are viewed as such on here.

Now you carry on with your 'mysoginistic' (sic) charge, which you likewise failed to justify on previous occasions.



I do not need a person who can't string together a reasonable argument for their belief to point out my flaws. You believe you are somehow above me, in that you know better, but never manage to prove it.



I don't usually pull you up on these matters, but I thought it was getting to the point where unless I said something then you'll end up going crazy. No doubt you'll only reply with another put-down, and in case you do, do not expect me to reply further on this matter. I'll get back to the thread.

[cromwell]

Again you fail to answer the issue, preferring to insult the person you communicate with even when it is pointed out in the post you respond to. One would normally conclude you do this because you have not the guts to tell the truth, which is that you can't answer my point with reasonable argument. This is so vacuous.



Lets make a guess at this though. Perhaps she claimed PTSD to wriggle her way out of that legal dispute. It's the kind of sh*t lawyers come out with. Sir, my client can not possible respond to you as she has PTSD.

Insult? No just pointing out the truth,it's not a question of guts but whether it's worth the effort,clearly it isn't.



Were I alone in pointing out your flaws your certainly mysoginistic bent then you might have a point,however almost to a man and woman you are viewed as such on here.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Oh no I've been around long enough to know I'm far from infallible,trying to explain anything to a closed mind though is a waste of effort when attempting to contest someone's thoughts.

Again you fail to answer the issue, preferring to insult the person you communicate with even when it is pointed out in the post you respond to. One would normally conclude you do this because you have not the guts to tell the truth, which is that you can't answer my point with reasonable argument. This is so vacuous.



Lets make a guess at this though. Perhaps she claimed PTSD to wriggle her way out of that legal dispute. It's the kind of shit lawyers come out with. Sir, my client can not possible respond to you as she has PTSD.

[cromwell]

I notice your inability to contest the point. The ad hominem always works in arguments. It means you can't possibly ever be wrong.



Do you fancy explaining why levels of stress doing a talk show or promoting Coca Cola is on par with what soldiers had seen in places like Vietnam? After all, you don't acknowledge any sexual differences in the land of received PC wisdom.

Oh no I've been around long enough to know I'm far from infallible,trying to explain anything to a closed mind though is a waste of effort when attempting to contest someone's thoughts.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Good post

  :hattip  but.........

Lost cause I'm afraid,when someone believes autism doesn't exist then persuading them of your view is to say at best difficult.

I notice your inability to contest the point. The ad hominem always works in arguments. It means you can't possibly ever be wrong.



Do you fancy explaining why levels of stress doing a talk show or promoting Coca Cola is on par with what soldiers had seen in places like Vietnam? After all, you don't acknowledge any sexual differences in the land of received PC wisdom.

[cromwell]

PTSD can be brought on due to a lot more circumstances than fighting in a war.

Good post

  :hattip  but.........

Lost cause I'm afraid,when someone believes autism doesn't exist then persuading them of your view is to say at best difficult.

[Bright Young Thing]

PTSD my arse!!!



Was the stress induced by her favourite nail varnish temporarily out of stock?



PTSE is from those who have been on the front line in bloody wars and seen their mates blown to smitheries.

PTSD can be brought on due to a lot more circumstances than fighting in a war.

[Baron von Lotsov]

Go on then...



Explain how Caroline Flack spending loads on beauty products has any relation to suicide and that of people with PTSD?



This should be interesting.

PTSD my arse!!!



Was the stress induced by her favourite nail varnish temporarily out of stock?



PTSE is from those who have been on the front line in bloody wars and seen their mates blown to smitheries.

[cromwell]

I don't think a clampdown on the laws around this area should necessarily be as controversial as many would undoubtedly seek to make them.  As far as I'm concerned, individual privacy is a two way street — while the law should seek to protect it appropriately, individuals are also responsible for taking reasonable steps to maintain their privacy.  In ye olde days, one would not reasonably expect to fall under the scope of "privacy" if they stood in their front garden with a megaphone blaring their opinions.  Posting things on social media — and therefore knowing full well that they will be viewable by the public at large — is essentially the same thing.  Regardless of the fact that one might do it from inside their own home, the intention is to publicise the view.  To me therefore, they are waiving the right to privacy for their views and should be treated as having published them.



The problem is that the law simply hasn't been able to keep up with the admittedly supersonic speed at which social media has taken a hold in society.  Older people and even some younger people who were growing up just when the Internet was really beginning to infiltrate individual personal lives were naive and ignorant to the wide range and lasting (even permanent) nature of the things they said online.  Comments on social media were viewed almost in the same way as off the cuff remarks to your mates — and nobody thought about reality of these "off the cuff" remarks being dragged up a decade later.   But the excuses aren't there anymore, everyone is now acutely aware that social media is more or less a public domain — and things written there (regardless if you do so from your own home) are invariably intended to be in the public domain.



It struck me particularly in the Colleen Rooney and Jessica Vardy storm-in-teacup-story.  OK, Rooney claimed it was a "private Instagram account", but to me, if you want things to be kept private and secret — why the f**k do you post about them online?    If I want something kept secret, it doesn't get near social media — even if my profile is on lockdown — because I know full well that once it's up there it is very much out of your hands where it ends up.  



As for the media, I don't believe there is any public interest served by identifying names of people in cases before they have had their day in court.  The only thing it satisfies is society's unhealthy obsession with peering into the private lives of others.

 :hattip

[Bright Young Thing]

Mod Notice



Just a brief reminder that this threat is about the suicide of a young woman, and the possible reasons for it and NOT about Drone flying or peoples views on benefits.



Please return to the OP or sanctions will be enforced forthwith.



Bright Young Thing

[Nick]

I have Nick on ignore and have had for a long time.

Because he refuses to accept some people use benefits as a life style choice. 😂 😂 😂



You should all try it, peaceful life.