Jump to content
Why become a member? ×

Substitute


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Mickyk said:

No you're are still a snowflake and anyone else who are offended by trivialities that back in the day no one even bothered about.ok mush

What makes you think I'm a snowflake, any posts in particular you'd like to quote or is it just something you (incorrectly) assumed? Have a little look through my posts on the thread eh?

"Back in the day" people didn't bother about a lot of things - our nation did disgusting things in the name of colonialism, we didn't let women vote, our police force openly ignored racist violence because they themselves were influenced by institutionalised racism - these were all seen as normal. Things change, some things which middle aged white guys used to get away with at the expense of others are no longer acceptable, it's just something you're going to have to deal with.

The good old days were only good for a certain demographic, no point romanticising over that. 

 

2 hours ago, Mickyk said:

Sounds to me like your'e the one who has overreacted about someone overreacting about something which hasn't been overreacted to .:biggrin:

Where did I overreact again?

 

 

You've quoted me twice now and still can't seem to articulate a specific point and resort to incorrect assumptions and generalisations. Why not have another go, third time lucky eh?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's been suggested that we get the site's profanity filter amended to turn the hackneyed and frankly boring 'snowflake' into something more innocuous and daft. I think it's a great idea, because quite frankly I am sick of the sight of that bloody word. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Rich said:

It's been suggested that we get the site's profanity filter amended to turn the hackneyed and frankly boring 'snowflake' into something more innocuous and daft. I think it's a great idea, because quite frankly I am sick of the sight of that bloody word. 

I think the problem with 'snowflake' as a term of of abuse is just that it's just a generic catch all term for anyone who challenges your opinion.

It lacks imagination and creativity.

Proper verbal abuse should be carefully and personally tailored to every individual you wish to insult.

Edited by Cato
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Happy Jack said:

Well that rules out "I fart in your general direction" then ...

Not if you put the emphasis on 'your'.

eg. I fart in YOUR general direction, other people may be affected by the fart, but that's just collateral damage.

I'm farting at You.

(This is just an example @Happy Jack, I'm not actually farting at you, we live over a hundred miles apart. I may occasionally fart in your general direction, but it's not personal).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Rich said:

It's been suggested that we get the site's profanity filter amended to turn the hackneyed and frankly boring 'snowflake' into something more innocuous and daft. I think it's a great idea, because quite frankly I am sick of the sight of that bloody word. 

Can the filter pick a random element from an array of strings? I'd personally be all for randomly replacing 'snowflake' with 'farty old witch', 'toilet smell', or any of the other mature and witty epithets found in the highly cerebral Viz comic strip "Spoilt B*st*rd"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Rich said:

It's been suggested that we get the site's profanity filter amended to turn the hackneyed and frankly boring 'marmalade sandwich' into something more innocuous and daft. I think it's a great idea, because quite frankly I am sick of the sight of that bloody word. 

 

17 hours ago, discreet said:

How about changing 'marmalade sandwich' to 'ocelot'?

Q: How do you titilate an ocelot?

A: Oscillate its tits a lot.

 

16 hours ago, Cato said:

I think the problem with 'marmalade sandwich' as a term of of abuse is just that it's just a generic catch all term for anyone who challenges your opinion.

It lacks imagination and creativity.

Proper verbal abuse should be carefully and personally tailored to every individual you wish to insult.

 

43 minutes ago, EliasMooseblaster said:

Can the filter pick a random element from an array of strings? I'd personally be all for randomly replacing 'marmalade sandwich' with 'farty old witch', 'toilet smell', or any of the other mature and witty epithets found in the highly cerebral Viz comic strip "Spoilt B*st*rd"

 

39 minutes ago, PaulWarning said:

the fact that marmalade sandwiches get upset by being called marmalade sandwiches proves the point doesn't it? Sticks and stones and all that

 

22 minutes ago, Rich said:

Delete 'get upset' and replace it with 'find it tiresome' and you're about right. I mean come on. "You're a marmalade sandwich, ner ner ni ner ner *pokes tongue out*". It's straight out of a primary school playground.

 

Just testing; a short simulation to see what it could become. As you were, folks; move along, please. :|

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you type 'can', is that really 'can' as in 'tin can', or is it another euphemism I've not yet heard of..? That's the trouble with all this slippage; once the basic rules are gone, there's no foothold, so it all goes to pot. If it continues, we're doomed as a species. Doomed, I tell'ee; doomed. :crazy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...