Lunchtime Live with Ciara Kelly [Mod warning post #1]

meeeeh · 09-11-2018 06:57PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I never said she should be treated differently btw. She's well suited to puff pieces and Magazine type fare. In fact it would be better for all if she stuck to Magazine type fare and stayed away from the serious stuff which she can't tackle objectively and impartially.

Replying twice to the same post doesn't make your arguments any more sensible. The most hard hitting journalists can make puff pieces. I suspect large part of Ciara's target audience would be female IT readers, fairly liberal, comfortable middle class. She is addressing them not bitter little (and I mean little in mindset) men who won't like her no matter what she says.

09-11-2018 07:04PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I post here because I feel the need to balance out the Ciara Kelly love-in from some posters TBH.

Of course she's allowed to have a different opinion to me; but like you're attempting to call me out on mine, I am free to call her out on hers, esp. when she displays gross hypocrisy and double standards on male/female issues, her man-hating, and likewise I am free to comment about her presenting style and unprofessionalism.

As for your comment about me being the person with the highest number of posts in this thread:
I doubt I am, but TBH, if you went to the trouble to check that and then say my behaviour is irrational and doesn't make sense then I think you need to google "irony".

And as predicted, no comment from you on Kelly's traveller comment though. What a surprise......

I no opinion on the traveller issue, none. So I'm not entirely sure what you think you're predicting. It takes all of 2 seconds to see how many posts someone has on a thread. On the forum page click on the number in the replies column for that thread, you have posted 198 times. The next highest is 152. It was no trouble to find that.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:04PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Replying twice to the same post doesn't make your arguments any more sensible. The most hard hitting journalists can make puff pieces. I suspect large part of Ciara's target audience would be female IT readers, fairly liberal, comfortable middle class. She is addressing them not bitter little (and I mean little in mindset) men who won't like her no matter what she says.

Re. comment in bold - I never said it did. I'm on a Dart and it's just easier to reply on the phone in smaller chunks. As a man I can't multitask apparently and construct more than one train of though at a time.

Personal comments again. Can you debate like an adult without getting personal with a poster?

Care to comment on her Traveller comment? I bet you won't. Do you honestly believe her on that?

JJayoo · 09-11-2018 07:05PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

You can't say that on here JJayoo.

But she's a horrible ****

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:08PM

Ahwell wrote: »

I no opinion on the traveller issue, none. So I'm not entirely sure what you think your predicting. It takes all of 2 seconds to see how many posts someone has on a thread. On the forum page click on the number in the replies column for that thread, you have posted 198 times. The next highest is 152. I was no trouble to find that.

The fact you looked it up at all isn't remotely ironic of course given your comments on my personality and behaviour on this thread.

I didn't ask you had you an opinion on the traveller issue. I asked you did you have an opinion on Ciara's comment on tv about Travellers and their caravans being welcome on her street and did you believe she was being honest about this? Or let me guess, you don't have an opinion on that, or more perhaps more accurately can't/won't answer a difficult question that sheds a poor light on Ciara. Rather convenient that.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:09PM

JJayoo wrote: »

But she's a horrible ****

No JJayoo, she's a brave hero who shows men to be the bitter little minded people they really are.

09-11-2018 07:13PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

The fact you looked it up at all isn't remotely ironic of course given your comments on my personality and behaviour on this thread.
.

No, I don't see the irony and I don't care what Ciara Kelly said about travellers on a TV show I didn't see.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:14PM

Ahwell wrote: »

No, I don't see the irony and I don't care what Ciara Kelly said about travellers on a TV show I didn't see.

Of course you don't!

By that rationale she can say anything she wants and as long as you don't hear it, it's fine.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:18PM

Ahwell wrote: »

I no opinion on the traveller issue, none. So I'm not entirely sure what you think you're predicting. It takes all of 2 seconds to see how many posts someone has on a thread. On the forum page click on the number in the replies column for that thread, you have posted 198 times. The next highest is 152. It was no trouble to find that.

I'm a frequent poster to the Radio Forum and many threads within it.

I have 29,000+ posts in total, 198 of which are on the Ciara Kelly thread.

You have 20 posts in total, 8 of which are about Ciara.

To look at it another way, she occupies a lot less of my time on boards than she does yours.

Uncharted · 09-11-2018 07:18PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Of course you don't!

By that rationale she can say anything she wants and as long as you don't hear it, it's fine.

Now now Butters,you know you're being a misogynistic woman hater!!!!

Sort yourself out please,away with you now,especially as you are a male,and obviously therefore,a rapist in the making....

Leave the Ciara-ettes alone!!

09-11-2018 07:22PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Of course you don't!

By that rationale she can say anything she wants and as long as you don't hear it, it's fine.

I just have no interest in the topic. You read into that all you want, I don't particularly care.

meeeeh · 09-11-2018 07:23PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Care to comment on her Traveller comment? I bet you won't. Do you honestly believe her on that?

What's your obsession with traveller comment? I have no opinion on it because I haven't heard it. I don't comment on stuff I don't hear myself. (For example I don't like Joe Duffy or Ray D'arcy but I don't comment on them because I don't listen to them.) And btw I don't need to agree with everything someone says to listen to them or to feel the need to challenge their statements. You will find very few negatives comments from me on any presenters. The only reason I comment here so much is because I feel a lot of criticism of Ciara Kelly is very negative, spiteful, unfair and nasty.

Btw I wouldn't want Travellers for neighbours but I also wouldn't want half of the non Traveller neighbours we have as neighbours.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:24PM

Ahwell wrote: »

I just have no interest in the topic. You read into that all you want, I don't particularly care.

Great engaging debating style there, not avoiding the issue at all.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:27PM

meeeeh wrote: »

What's your obsession with traveller comment? I have no opinion on it because I haven't heard it. I don't comment on stuff I don't hear myself. (For example I don't like Joe Duffy or Ray D'arcy but I don't comment on them because I don't listen to them.)

I wouldn't want Travellers for neighbours but I also wouldn't want half of the non Traveller neighbours we have as neighbours.

Why do you call it an obsession?

You know what she said, and if you don't you can google it or watch it back for yourself.

It's incredibly interesting that all of her defenders refuse to engage on this at all and that they won't discuss anything which casts their hero in a less than perfect light.

09-11-2018 07:27PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Great engaging debating style there, not avoiding the issue at all.

Not avoiding anything. If it was something I had a opinion about I would argue the toss about it. It it is you who are insisting I should have have an opinion. I don't.

meeeeh · 09-11-2018 07:30PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Why do you call it an obsession?

You know what she said, and if you don't you can google it or watch it back for yourself.

It's incredibly interesting that all of her defenders refuse to engage on this at all and that they won't discuss anything which casts their hero in a less than perfect light.

I edited my previous post but again I really don't care who wants or doesn't want travellers for neighbours neither it is criteria I would judge a presenter by. Btw if I were be interested on the subject I would comment in the thread about that programme.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:31PM

Ahwell wrote: »

Not avoiding anything. If it was something I had a opinion about I would argue the toss about it. It it is you who are insisting I should have have an opinion. I don't.

I'm not insisting on anything. I am however stating that it's incredibly convenient that you don't have an opinion on something that paints her in a negative light and being somewhat of a hypocrite, but have lots of opinions on her when it when it suits your narrative.

JJayoo · 09-11-2018 07:33PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

No JJayoo, she's a brave hero who shows men to be the bitter little minded people they really are.

I liked when she accused a GP of being directly responsible for the death of her father on the radio, and then Newstalk had to do an apology, but she didn't.

But on the subject of the hating men stuff I think it's 100% her jumping on this current wave for financial gain.

09-11-2018 07:35PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I'm a frequent poster to the Radio Forum and many threads within it.

I have 29,000+ posts in total, 198 of which are on the Ciara Kelly thread.

You have 20 posts in total, 8 of which are about Ciara.

To look at it another way, she occupies a lot less of my time on boards than she does yours.

6 of those are from today. The fact you are by far the biggest contributor to this thread is notable and I don't think pointing that out is that ironic.

ButtersSuki · 09-11-2018 07:38PM

meeeeh wrote: »

I edited my previous post but again I really don't care who wants or doesn't want travellers for neighbours neither it is criteria I would judge a presenter by. Btw if I would be interested on the subject I would comment in the thread about that programme.

So you're definitely not ignoring me then for the moment at least? Ok.

Completely missing the point and/or avoiding the subject, and deliberately so I suspect - again.

The point is she made a statement saying she would have no problem with them encamping en masse on her street. I simply do not believe her on that, and given the comments on the TV show pages and online afterwards I am not alone in this belief.

I wouldn't want travellers pulling up in caravans in my street but I'm not going on TV saying I'd be perfectly happy with it when I sincerely doubt that's her actual real opinion on the subject given the vast majority of "settled" people in this country would absolutely not want them in their neighbourhood.

Your comment on your other non-travelling neighbours is completely irrelevant to the conversation btw and . merely an attempt to dilute, but you of course know this.

My stop is up next and I'll be driving for a while thereafter but not running away from this (as you - I think - previously alleged on another occasion). I'll return later or perhaps over the weekend.

09-11-2018 07:42PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

I'm not insisting on anything. I am however stating that it's incredibly convenient that you don't have an opinion on something that paints her in a negative light and being somewhat of a hypocrite, but have lots of opinions on her when it when it suits your narrative.

I never expressed my opinion about Ciara Kelly on this thread. Positive, negative or otherwise.

meeeeh · 09-11-2018 07:55PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

So you're definitely not ignoring me then for the moment at least? Ok.

Completely missing the point and/or avoiding the subject, and deliberately so I suspect - again.

The point is she made a statement saying she would have no problem with them encamping en masse on her street. I simply do not believe her on that, and given the comments on the TV show pages and online afterwards I am not alone in this belief.

I wouldn't want travellers pulling up in caravans in my street but I'm not going on TV saying I'd be perfectly happy with it when I sincerely doubt that's her actual real opinion on the subject given the vast majority of "settled" people in this country would absolutely not want them in their neighbourhood.

Your comment on your other non-travelling neighbours is completely irrelevant to the conversation btw and . merely an attempt to dilute, but you of course know this.

My stop is up next and I'll be driving for a while thereafter but not running away from this (as you - I think - previously alleged on another occasion). I'll return later or perhaps over the weekend.

I think you or anyone else are perfectly entitled not to believe her statement about Travellers. How is that relevant for this thread I haven't got a clue though.

If you are expecting me to watch Cutting Edge just to judge her comments you will be disappointed. I have no interest to do that and as said I don't comment on the stuff I haven't heard myself because I don't know the context.

Say Your Number · 09-11-2018 08:30PM

Mod: No more of this nonsense please.

Dick Swiveller · 09-11-2018 10:16PM

Ahwell wrote: »

You're right, it was a typo. Isn't Ciara Kelly allowed to have opinions you dislike? You are, by far, the person with the highest number of posts in this thread. A thread about a presenter and a show you clearly dislike. That is not rational, i.e, it doesn't make sense.

I've seen people make this point before, and I find it pretty ridiculous tbh. She presents a programme during the lunchtime slot. Lots of people enjoy listening to talk radio during their lunch break (I do). Whatever your opinion is of the presenter, he/she will be discussing issues that will be of interest to a talk radio junkie. I'm not a big fan of Marian Finucane but I still tune in to her programme every weekend. Anyway, what's wrong with people critcising her. Do you want a thread where everybody agrees she's fantastic?

ButtersSuki · 10-11-2018 10:52AM

To the poster who said I only criticise, I have huge admiration for the satirical work of Oliver Callan and thoroughly enjoy his "Callan's Kicks" podcast. The standard varies from week to week and impressions are stronger than the writing, sure; but when it's good, it's very good.

Interestingly (and somewhat on topic), for the last 2 weeks, the podcast has a new sketch entitled "Liberal Ladies". I couldn't possibly imagine where on earth he got the inspiration for the characters........

Uncharted · 10-11-2018 11:25AM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

To the poster who said I only criticise, I have huge admiration for the satirical work of Oliver Callan and thoroughly enjoy his "Callan's Kicks" podcast. The standard varies from week to week and impressions are stronger than the writing, sure; but when it's good, it's very good.

Interestingly (and somewhat on topic), for the last 2 weeks, the podcast has a new sketch entitled "Liberal Ladies". I couldn't possibly imagine where on earth he got the inspiration for the characters........

Agreed. Callans material is infinitely better than Rosenstocks.
One advantage (If one exists) of having "media celebs" like Cackling Kelly is Callan et al giving them a good roasting when they inevitably disappear up their own holes.

"Give em enough rope.............and all that good stuff"

southstar · 10-11-2018 01:54PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Thanks for the free psychoanalysis there.

My “hatred of the women”? Please explain why I hate (a very strong word) “the women”? Is it all women? If you meant “woman” and it was a typo, please give me your evidence for my “hatred” of her. I don’t hate her, I just find her very unprofessional, an egomaniac, arrogant, and incredibly full of her own self-importance (as evidenced by her repeated failure to listen to many (note: not all) experts she has on her show instead attempting to shoe-horn her own opinion into a debate as of it were fact, which it is not)....and that’s before we dare discuss her continuous and almost non-stop male-bashing on the show.

Please show me evidence of my irrationality of my postings on Ciara. Or am I not allowed to have an opinion that you dislike?

Care to also comment on her profession that Travellers would be welcome with their caravsnsvon her street? Do you genuinely believe she meant that? I’m guessing you won’t.

Or did she perhaps get caught up in the moment and thought it would be the “cool”, PC, liberal thing to say at the time without thinking it though fully?

Likewise I’m guessing you won’t comment on the Male-bashing; or if you do, will you resort to the “bitter men” line who don’t like a woman having an opinion as recently posted on here?

In the taxi again... the sandwich shop or the train to Belfast perhaps.... Certainly in denial..

ButtersSuki · 10-11-2018 02:26PM

southstar wrote: »

In the taxi again... the sandwich shop or the train to Belfast perhaps.... Certainly in denial..

Not in denial about anything. I’ve repeatedly - and clearly have to again - said:
(A) that I don’t listen to the show out of choice
(B) yes, I have caught snippets/segments of the show in public places - I didn’t realise you can only comment on the show if you’re at home or at work? :rolleyes:
(C) I have - out of choice, freely and voluntarily - listened to the show or parts of the show both live and on the listen back feature. I have posted re. that show’s content concurrent to the live broadcast or at the time of listening back. I once dared to comment on a segment of the show without hearing it but having read the entire day’s posts on the content of said show and was castigated by a certain poster for doing so. To appease her, I listened back to the show but unsure without checking if I revised my opinion. Apparently you’re not allowed have an opinion on anything these days unless you heard or saw the show in question no matter how widely reported the contents of said show are in other media/social media outlets.

You seem to be insinuating or implying that I’m listening and pretending not to be? I assure you I’m not. If I were, my post count (a fascination for some apparently) would likely be considerably higher. I often go days and indeed weeks without commenting on it here; if I were a daily listener I’d be commenting daily as I’m sure she would give me plenty of material to comment on.

southstar · 10-11-2018 02:58PM

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Not in denial about anything. I’ve repeatedly - and clearly have to again - said:
(A) that I don’t listen to the show out of choice
(B) yes, I have caught snippets/segments of the show in public places - I didn’t realise you can only comment on the show if you’re at home or at work? :rolleyes:
(C) I have - out of choice, freely and voluntarily - listened to the show or parts of the show both live and on the listen back feature. I have posted re. that show’s content concurrent to the live broadcast or at the time of listening back. I once dared to comment on a segment of the show without hearing it but having read the entire day’s posts on the content of said show and was castigated by a certain poster for doing so. To appease her, I listened back to the show but unsure without checking if I revised my opinion. Apparently you’re not allowed have an opinion on anything these days unless you heard or saw the show in question no matter how widely reported the contents of said show are in other media/social media outlets.

You seem to be insinuating or implying that I’m listening and pretending not to be? I assure you I’m not. If I were, my post count (a fascination for some apparently) would likely be considerably higher. I often go days and indeed weeks without commenting on it here; if I were a daily listener I’d be commenting daily as I’m sure she would give me plenty of material to comment on.

Zzzzz... so little time

ButtersSuki · 10-11-2018 04:30PM

southstar wrote: »

Zzzzz... so little time

Wow. You pass a smart and factually inaccurate comment, I take the time (again) to reply in detail, and ask a question or two of you....and the above is your reply?

It speaks volumes.

Lunchtime Live with Ciara Kelly [Mod warning post #1]

Comments