Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Wentworth Miller declines Russian Film Festival Invite

1235

Comments

  • #122
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    You have to hand it to Putin for standing up to certain extremities of modern society when no other Western politician would dare. He is not entirely right and has maybe gone too far but he has a point in certain instances.

    Which instances has he a point? Which ones has he gone too far?

    Do you support the law?


  • #123
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    My point is thus:

    The main thinking of the Putin regime, and the Russian people, seems to be a fear than technically illegal, excessive displays will happen on the streets of Russia, rather than dignified expression.


    Apart from deliberately misrepresenting my comments, not one person has addressed the theory.

    Discuss or STFU.

    And what kind of excesses are you thinking about?


  • #124
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    I have said his laws go too far.

    I have said he should not be sending police to beat protesters.

    Funny how you didn't notice that but spun a completely different story out of some other things I said.

    You came crashing in with this

    "You have to hand it to Putin for standing up to certain extremities of modern society when no other Western politician would dare. He is not entirely right and has maybe gone too far but he has a point in certain instances."

    I think you knew you were being a bit of a card, a bit provocative, no?


  • #125
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    efb wrote: »
    Which instances has he a point? Which ones has he gone too far?

    Do you support the law?

    Do you retract and apologise for previous deliberate misrepresentation of my posts?

    Do you fuk.


  • #126
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    Do you retract and apologise for previous deliberate misrepresentation of my posts?

    Do you fuk.

    What deliberate misinterpretation? You made a statement I questioned it. What was the arseless chaps and lesbian oral sec comment for???


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    Do you retract and apologise for previous deliberate misrepresentation of my posts?

    Do you fuk.

    Here's you, earlier, misrepresenting your own argument with a bit of fakery

    "women going down O'Connell Street on a float with tits out licking each other out at midday might offend the general publlic"


  • #128
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    old hippy wrote: »
    Here's you, earlier, misrepresenting your own argument with a bit of fakery

    "women going down O'Connell Street on a float with tits out licking each other out at midday might offend the general publlic"

    And people have tried to ask if this was an event that actually happened.

    I saw a lad running down Henry St with a flamethrower the orher day, killed 20 people. Amazingly, it wasn't even on the news. It happend mind.


  • #129
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    And people have tried to ask if this was an event that actually happened.

    I saw a lad running down Henry St with a flamethrower the orher day, killed 20 people. Amazingly, it wasn't even on the news. It happens mind.

    So you create non-existent scenarios in order to get your point across, hmm?

    Sounds a bit excessive to me.


  • #130
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,644 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    And people have tried to ask if this was an event that actually happened.

    I saw a lad running down Henry St with a flamethrower the orher day, killed 20 people. Amazingly, it wasn't even on the news. It happend mind.

    You justified your reasoning for the law to be a good idea because it would stop "women licking each other out on floats in public during gay pride parades".
    If it never happened then your justification for the law to be a good idea is garbage so which is it?
    Did it happen and your correct about the law? or did it not happen and your just talking out of your ass cus you dont like certain sections of society?


  • #131
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    old hippy wrote: »
    So you create non-existent scenarios in order to get your point across, hmm?

    Sounds a bit excessive to me.


    More excessive is to misrepresent hypothetical scenarios as the opinion of someone.

    Old Hippy , Efb and Mango Salsa are child molesters who cook puppys alive. They said it in posts they made here a few pages back.

    Ain't too fair, is it? Yet it seems to be a way to misrepresent a person that all three posters have used, so why shouldn't I be allowed to as well? Because it is wrong is why. Because it is an easier way to discredit an opinion rather than actively tackling it. If you disagree by all means do so, but don't paint an ogre just because you don't have a valid response.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    pundy
    Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭pundy


    my belief is that Putin's nonsense wont last long. it will be sorted out - they've already begun boycotting Russian produce in the US in protest, pouring bottles of Vodka made in Russia out into the drains.

    Some people here arguing, saying it is an agreeable law are small minded bigots.


  • #133
    pundy
    Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭pundy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    More excessive is to misrepresent hypothetical scenarios as the opinion of someone.

    Old Hippy , Efb and Mango Salsa are child molesters who cook puppys alive. They said it in posts they made here a few pages back.

    Ain't too fair, is it? Yet it seems to be a way to misrepresent a person that all three posters have used, so why shouldn't I be allowed to as well? Because it is wrong is why. Because it is an easier way to discredit an opinion rather than actively tackling it. If you disagree by all means do so, but don't paint an ogre just because you don't have a valid response.

    your opinion doesnt count if it is based on uneducated bigotry.


  • #134
    old hippy
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 9,441 ✭✭✭old hippy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    More excessive is to misrepresent hypothetical scenarios as the opinion of someone.

    Old Hippy , Efb and Mango Salsa are child molesters. They said it in posts they made here a few pages back.

    Ain't too fair, is it? Yet it seems to be a way to misrepresent a person that all three posters have used, so why shouldn't I be allowed to as well? Because it is wrong is why. Because it is an easier way to discredit an opinion rather than actively tackling it.

    You haven't been misrepresented, you came on making provocative statements, fully aware you'd be challenged. You've been challenged, you don't like it and aren't able to handle the criticism. So what do you do? You dig a really big hole for yourself. Best take off those shades, Ron...


  • #135
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,644 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    More excessive is to misrepresent hypothetical scenarios as the opinion of someone.

    Old Hippy , Efb and Mango Salsa are child molesters who cook puppys alive. They said it in posts they made here a few pages back.

    Ain't too fair, is it? Yet it seems to be a way to misrepresent a person that all three posters have used, so why shouldn't I be allowed to as well? Because it is wrong is why. Because it is an easier way to discredit an opinion rather than actively tackling it. If you disagree by all means do so, but don't paint an ogre just because you don't have a valid response.

    Theres no misrepresentation happening here, you used that hypothetical scenario to agree with the russian laws. But if such a scenario has never happened that justification is bullshit.


  • #136
    GorillaRising
    Closed Accounts Posts: 293 ✭✭GorillaRising


    Femme_Fatale wrote: »
    I always find when I don't give a **** about something I just don't read or post to the thread.
    efb wrote: »
    I'm sure an opinion can be teased out eventually. If they really didnt care they wouldnt post. What drew them to the topic?

    I genuinely couldn't give a sh!t. I'm reading the thread because it's current and I'm always interested in different points of view on current affairs, regardless of what side of the rainbow fence they're on.


  • #137
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    old hippy wrote: »
    You haven't been misrepresented, you came on making provocative statements, fully aware you'd be challenged. You've been challenged, you don't like it and aren't able to handle the criticism. So what do you do? You dig a really big hole for yourself. Best take of those shades, Ron...

    Bollocks.

    I used a hypothetical comparison to a fictional event on O' Connell St.

    At least two posters said I claimed said event had ACTUALLY occured.

    I can't see the difference myself. All I see is a clamour to suppress the freedom of non violent and non prejudicial expression.


  • #138
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,644 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    Bollocks.

    I used a hypothetical comparison to a fictional event on O' Connell St.

    At least two posters said I claimed said event had ACTUALLY occured.

    I can't see the difference myself.

    Exactly its a fictional event but you used a fictional event to justify the introduction of these horrible laws, thats what people have a problem with and not the imaginary argument you seem to be having with everyone


  • #139
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Exactly its a fictional event but you used a fictional event to justify the introduction of these horrible laws, thats what people have a problem with and not the imaginary argument you seem to be having with everyone

    :pac:

    Goodnight. A discussion is not a discussion without truth, clear representation, and respect of opinions. So far all we have had is cliques of blatnt misquoting, so why bother? With opponents like this one wonders why Putin does resist democracy.


  • #140
    Leftist
    Registered Users Posts: 2,230 ✭✭✭Leftist


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    :pac:

    Goodnight. A discussion is not a discussion without truth, clear representation, and respect of opinions.

    yeah but tbf you're all over the place.

    calm down and start again?


  • #141
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,644 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    :pac:

    Goodnight. A discussion is not a discussion without truth, clear representation, and respect of opinions.

    Ahh the only response from someone who cant argue their way out of a paper bag without resorting to insults and ignoring all questions posed to them - quitting, im sure your going far in life


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    pundy
    Registered Users Posts: 673 ✭✭✭pundy


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    :pac:

    Goodnight. A discussion is not a discussion without truth, clear representation, and respect of opinions. So far all we have had is cliques of blatnt misquoting, so why bother? With opponents like this one wonders why Putin does resist democracy.

    Your opinion can not be respected, as it is widely disrespected for being one based on unfounded hatred and homophobia (from what i can gather)


  • #143
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Ahh the only response from someone who cant argue their way out of a paper bag without resorting to insults and ignoring all questions posed to them - quitting, im sure your going far in life


    Insulted? Insulted who?

    I made a fraudulent claim that three posters were kiddie fiddlers, using completely made up "evidence". Just for a reaction to facetious claims they said I had made in my posts. All I see is a load of people who can't get a point across without lies and slander.

    Rebuttal? Or apology maybe?


  • #144
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    pundy wrote: »
    Your opinion can not be respected, as it is widely disrespected for being one based on unfounded hatred and homophobia (from what i can gather)

    I said in my initial posts that Russian gays should have the right to protest and should not be beaten and arrested by the police.

    Jesus, how far do I have to go? Shag one?


  • #145
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,787 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    Insulted? Insulted who?

    I made a fraudulent claim that three posters were kiddie fiddlers, using completely made up "evidence". Just for a reaction to facetious claims they said I had made in my posts. All I see is a load of people who can't get a point across without lies and slander.

    Rebuttal? Or apology maybe?

    Apologise for what? pointing out that your argument doesn't hold up and is completely absurd, unreasonable, senseless and illogical?

    I mean seriously - you negated your own argument by introducing a concept that clearly doesn't happen and you want an apology because we pointed that out!

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #146
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    mango salsa wrote: »
    Apologise for what? pointing out that your argument doesn't hold up and is completely absurd, unreasonable, senseless and illogical?

    I mean seriously - you negated your own argument by introducing a concept that clearly doesn't happen and you want an apology because we pointed that out!

    You deliberately misrepresented a hypothetical scenario, because you had **** all better to reply with.


  • #147
    efb
    Closed Accounts Posts: 35,514 ✭✭✭✭efb


    Wow the hole has gotten bigger since I was here last...


  • #148
    Annasopra
    Registered Users Posts: 40,787 ✭✭✭✭Annasopra


    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    You deliberately misrepresented a hypothetical scenario, because you had **** all better to reply with.

    The only misrepresentation around here is this
    Sunglasses Ron wrote: »
    I think the laws are more to do with preventing blatant violation of law and culturally accepted tradition at parades than anything else. Their thinking seems to be that whilst public nudity seems to be illegal in most of the EU, dressing like a biker with arseless pants seems to get a free pass as long as you are at a parade doing it with a few thousand others. I love going to strip clubs for an old laugh and a drink, but I can see a reason why women going down O'Connell Street on a float with tits out licking each other out at midday might offend the general publlic, even if I personally would enjoy the sight. Similarly, I can partly understand the Russian laws they have just drafted.

    It was so much easier to blame it on Them. It was bleakly depressing to think that They were Us. If it was Them, then nothing was anyone's fault. If it was us, what did that make Me? After all, I'm one of Us. I must be. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.

    Terry Pratchet



  • #149
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    efb wrote: »
    Wow the hole has gotten bigger since I was here last...

    Indeed it has.

    I made a claim about Russian culture and society. An even handed "don't go too far, but defend what your people want to a fair extent" type stuff.

    People misrepresented and lied about my posts.

    I responded. Threw in an auld lie against three folks seeing as they had done it against me. All evens like.

    People avoided. Spun some more oblique rubbish.

    Big hole. Full of conjecture, but a big hole.

    Putin is by no means perfect but the average Russian is a fair bit more well off under his tenure than they were in the post Soviet days under that drunk Yeltsin. You can't blame them for holding faith in him despite his flaws.


  • #150
    Sunglasses Ron
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,180 ✭✭✭Sunglasses Ron


    mango salsa wrote: »
    The only misrepresentation around here is this

    You attempted to portray me as saying that event actually happened.

    Care to clarify?

    Of course not.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    okay, this thread has gone a special kind of madness. Please get back on topics and stop with the accusations and twisted meanings etc.


Advertisement