Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

[thfcsteff]

That’s not really a great arguement for rejoining though is it?

I did not offer the comment as a statement either way, I offered it as a TRUTH.


...we're so far beyond the 'question' you've posed...so so far beyond it...

 

[robp135]

We now live entirely in a world where any idiot can make an outrageous statement, and the burden of proof lies on the victim/recipients of that statement to disprove it. Add to this the increased pace of 'information', the calibration of people to keep 'moving' briskly and only take notice of 'highlights' (this was the utter disgrace of twitter and its 144 character model) and fuse it with the fear and desperation mentioned above, and I find myself wondering how we can escape this self-created trap.

To that, I think it is vital that wherever possible, we support local organic initiatives. Support your local coffee shop or boozer. Get a couple of mates together once a week or so and spend some time talking about whatever, but face-to-face over a coffee or a pint. Make that time. Read books, real ones. Listen to an entire album sometimes, not just a snippet. Wherever possible, engage in a different cultural element than your own, whether that be food, art, whatever. Be active, walk, run, cycle, play footy, whatever, just stretch your body and mind. If you feel the urge to write something, or draw, or create a piece of music, do it, and do it proudly without fearing judgement or ridicule, just do it. Delete your X account if you haven't already. And most of all, as much as life tries to throw fear bombs into your everyday life, reject them. Choose finding one positive thing a day (if not more), but start with one. I mean, I think it's a practical way through?
p.s. I think it is also safe to again suggest watching Tottenham Hotspur!!!!!!

I agree and I also agree with Spurs being exempt from the personal revoult.

 

[robp135]

I did not offer the comment as a statement either way, I offered it as a TRUTH.

I did not offer the comment as a statement either way, I offered it as a fudging TRUTH.
I understand wholeheartedly that you'd be against rejoining. I won't speculate as to where you were when Cameron brick the bed and either cucked for Putin or committed one of the most selfish, stupid, and assumptive actions I have seen from a 'global leader'. And, frankly, a truth that has been partially delivered by Brexit, which was the absolute catalyst for all Putin has been looking to do to Europe.


...we're so far beyond the 'question' you've posed...so so far beyond it...

You don’t always have to respond with your personal truth.

I didn’t think we should have left the EU. I don’t think we should rejoin. Both perfectly reasonable opinions.

 

[thfcsteff]

You don’t always have to respond with your personal truth.

I didn’t think we should have left the EU. I don’t think we should rejoin. Both perfectly reasonable opinions.

I think you mean 'one doesn't'...no need to speak for me. I am very, very careful about what I write, so when I respond with a personal truth, it is absolutely intended...

A word about the post you responded to versus the one I ended up editing.
You often post in what I consider to be a provocative and obtuse fashion, seeing to edge a line without taking one. It could be seen as 'fishing'.
I often have to read three of your posts in a row to understand what you're really saying; again, this is your style, and I accept that; however, you do often project as a willing provocateur.
You once complained that I go in and 'edit' my posts. In your case, I do so because (as I said above) it takes two or three of your posts for me to ascertain exactly what you're trying to say/intending to say.

It's why sometimes (this case being an example) the post you responded to was not the post I ended up leaving as record.

I am still not sure whether you are aware of your sometime-projection, or whether it is simply your style. Either way, I felt it worth the time to write a reason as to why such reactions sometimes occur...

 

[robp135]

I think you mean 'one doesn't'...no need to speak for me. I am very, very careful about what I write, so when I respond with a personal truth, it is absolutely intended.

My grammar is very poor from a combination of laziness in these settings and my brain not functioning that way. If your intent was to belittle me you achieved your goal. If it was something else, I’d suggest you refrain from the corrections unless you genuinely do not understand what I’ve said.

 

[thfcsteff]

My grammar is very poor from a combination of laziness in these settings and my brain not functioning that way.

Got it. I somewhat thought the latter might be true, but as I've said many time here, I try (trying to being the operative word!) not to make assumptions on things I don't know (which is frankly a lot!)...

If your intent was to belittle me you achieved your goal.

That was absolutely not my intent whatsoever. I took offence to being (as I saw it) patronized. I take care over what I write, in the same way I take care of what I say to people.

If it was something else, I’d suggest you refrain from the corrections unless you genuinely do not understand what I’ve said.

My counter to this is that I cannot be expected to account for your self-professed laziness. Words are part of my livlihood so I take them seriously. I am not a grammar clown shoe in any way; I do think it is important to take care of words used when addressing them specifically to someone.

 

[thfcsteff]

We can only rejoin based on a referendum or election that’s an effective referendum on rejoining. Giving Britain zero leverage in negotiations to rejoin.

Is that true? I genuinely do not know what sort of leverage we would/wouldn't have, thus my question is in earnest.

 

[robp135]

Is that true? I genuinely do not know what sort of leverage we would/wouldn't have, thus my question is in earnest.

Technically speaking they could re-join if parliament approved. But in reality that would never get the votes needed without it being clear the public is on side which would require another referendum or an election where rejoining is the principal manifesto item.

 

[robp135]

Got it. I somewhat thought the latter might be true, but as I've said many time here, I try (trying to being the operative word!) not to make assumptions on things I don't know (which is frankly a lot!)...




That was absolutely not my intent whatsoever. I took offence to being (as I saw it) patronized. I take care over what I write, in the same way I take care of what I say to people.



My counter to this is that I cannot be expected to account for your self-professed laziness. Words are part of my livlihood so I take them seriously. I am not a grammar clown shoe in any way; I do think it is important to take care of words used when addressing them specifically to someone.

If you don’t understand what I have said, just ask for clarification rather than correct. That would be appreciated.

 

[thfcsteff]

If you don’t understand what I have said, just ask for clarification rather than correct. That would be appreciated.

Rob.

FWIW I often ask you for clarification.

One other thing. I actually think you're a very neat and tidy writer who uses language very acutely and precisely. Take it as a compliment that I sometimes find what you say offensive, yet done so with craft ...don't undervalue your literary skills (again I offer this with genuine compliments)...