Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

hotmail.com wrote: »

I repeat again, I was talking about social media.

And you're victim blaming. Because that's not a solution. It's just putting the onus on the victim to reduce their profile to avoid criminal activity being directed at them.

Would you tell them to stop using a mobile phone because they're getting abusive calls? Or change their number? That they have to publish? Or have some young intern take the calls instead? Are these your 'solutions'?

Lemming wrote: »

What people are over-looking - to convey just how febril & toxic the current environment in the UK is right now - is that it was a female MP who has already been murdered over Brexit. And that was in a far less febril, less toxic environment than is now the case. To be frank, with the incredibly crass terminology being thrown about by Al, Nige' and their supporters, I'm [thankfully] surprised that there has not been another attempt already.

I'm getting a flavour of the toxic environment on here. Me making a rather benign suggestion that politicians leave social media and I'm accused as victim blaming by 2 rather angry sounding posters on here, undermining their condemnation of online abuse.

Lemming

hotmail.com wrote: »

To reduce the abuse. Plenty of politicians don't use social media and fare just fine.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Only when it's directed at their protagonist. And yet again, it's not just Twitter. It's easy to 'win' arguments when you ignore the facts. Since you appear to be having difficulty reading up a few posts, they're getting letters, text messages, phone calls and shouted at on the street.

What people are over-looking in being dismissive of the highlighting of abuse - to convey just how febril & toxic the current environment in the UK is right now - is that it was a female MP who has already been murdered over Brexit. And that was in a far less febril, less toxic environment than is now the case. To be frank, with the incredibly crass terminology being thrown about by Al, Nige' and their supporters, I'm [thankfully] surprised that there has not been another attempt already.

Strazdas

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Kuenssberg up to her usual

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1189631613660995584

Too many of her tweets seem way too favourable in their treatment of the government party.

prawnsambo wrote: »

And I said that that's victim blaming and doesn't solve the problem one tiny little bit because politicians have to be contactable.

And the death threats and heavy abuse don't come on social media because the cowards know that they can be tracked back to source. Death threats are a criminal offence. I presume you know that.

I repeat again, I was talking about social media.

hotmail.com wrote: »

No I said social media only. And I said that it might reduce the abuse by leaving social media. I didn't say it will end entirely.

Please read my posts again.

And I said that that's victim blaming and doesn't solve the problem one tiny little bit because politicians have to be contactable.

And the death threats and heavy abuse don't come on social media because the cowards know that they can be tracked back to source. Death threats are a criminal offence. I presume you know that.

prawnsambo wrote: »

Only when it's directed at their protagonist. And yet again, it's not just Twitter. It's easy to 'win' arguments when you ignore the facts. Since you appear to be having difficulty reading up a few posts, they're getting letters, text messages, phone calls and shouted at on the street.

And you are clearly victim blaming here. Because you haven't even bothered to understand what and how the problem has manifested, just immediately telling them to 'get off social media' as if this is the only method of communicating abuse.

No I said social media only. And I said that it might reduce the abuse by leaving social media. I didn't say it will end entirely.

Please read my posts again.

hotmail.com wrote: »

They will have office hours and an office number.

A lot of politicians survive without social media and get re elected.

Usually when the term snowflake is mentioned, the person is losing the argument.

Only when it's directed at their protagonist. And yet again, it's not just Twitter. It's easy to 'win' arguments when you ignore the facts. Since you appear to be having difficulty reading up a few posts, they're getting letters, text messages, phone calls and shouted at on the street.

And you are clearly victim blaming here. Because you haven't even bothered to understand what and how the problem has manifested, just immediately telling them to 'get off social media' as if this is the only method of communicating abuse.

lawred2

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Kuenssberg up to her usual

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1189631613660995584

She's given up all pretence at this stage

If BJ gets his majority and can drive his deal through

What's his plan in relation to the predicted downturn this will cause

Will he slowplay the whole thing or what's their thinking, a bad brexit is bad for his legacy.

listermint wrote: »

Your right. I mean when people know you from the newspaper or like tv. Theyve every right to throw nasty comments at you.

Take it..sure your famous it's your fault....

Pffft

Anyway way of topic.

My point was specifically related to social media. I take it you've calmed down as you want to move on.

prawnsambo wrote: »

And I said it's not just Twitter up above ^

Politicians have to be contactable. It's the job. So I suppose on learning that, you'll call them snowflakes and tell them to quit, yes?

They will have office hours and an office number.

A lot of politicians survive without social media and get re elected.

Usually when the term snowflake is mentioned, the person is losing the argument.

listermint wrote: »

Your right. I mean when people know you from the newspaper or like tv. Theyve every right to throw nasty comments at you.

Take it..sure your famous it's your fault....

Pffft

Anyway way of topic.

Your words

hotmail.com wrote: »

Well that certainly wasn't the point.

I'm merely stating the obvious.. that perhaps politicians leave Twitter.

It's not rocket science.

And I said it's not just Twitter up above ^

Politicians have to be contactable. It's the job. So I suppose on learning that, you'll call them snowflakes and tell them to quit, yes?

Twister2 wrote: »

Elected officials and sportspeople etc have a choice to make in relation to their online profile and interactions

Simple statement of fact

Your right. I mean when people know you from the newspaper or like tv. Theyve every right to throw nasty comments at you.

Take it..sure your famous it's your fault....

Pffft

Anyway way of topic.

prawnsambo wrote: »

This is victim blaming. And tacitly excusing the abuse.

Well that certainly wasn't the point.

I'm merely stating the obvious.. that perhaps politicians leave Twitter.

It's not rocket science.

hotmail.com wrote: »

To reduce the abuse. Plenty of politicians don't use social media and fare just fine.

This is victim blaming. And tacitly excusing the abuse.

A Dub in Glasgo

Kuenssberg up to her usual

https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1189631613660995584

Elected officials and sportspeople etc have a choice to make in relation to their online profile and interactions

Simple statement of fact

briany

brick tamland wrote: »

Is there any chance of Farage doing some sort of deal with Boris? You have that think if so there would be a big majority with Lib Dems and Labour splitting the remain vote.

The problem with a Farage pact is that the BXP will probably be wanting a no-deal Brexit in return for their support, but the Conservatives currently intend to campaign on the platform of having a deal on the table and just needing a majority to get it over the line. If they do a deal with the BXP, it's going to lead to some seriously mixed messages from the Conservative party. It would also be highly problematic because it's quite easy to forget that the Conservative party also contains a caucus of MPs who are vehemently opposed to no-deal.

Nigel Farage is probably a worried man at the moment. He needs the Conservatives more than they need him at this stage. They have a deal in hand. Yes, the deal has problems and things I definitely think should be amended, but largely looks reasonable to the British public. This threatens to render Farage both a marginal voice in domestic politics as well as being ejected from the EUP. Lose-lose, Nigel.

listermint wrote: »

Your not giving an alternative view. Your advocating the abuse by telling them they shouldn't use the platform.

So rather than criticise the perpetrators your defending their right to harass...

Yes it's nonsense not alternative.

I just said that it's not an excuse for the abuse and offered up an idea.

Take a bloody chill pill and calm down.

Boris "standing up for the police"

Will anyone fall for that bs

hotmail.com wrote: »

If you actually read what I said, there is no excuse for the abuse.

You don't like alternative views is your problem.

Your not giving an alternative view. Your advocating the abuse by telling them they shouldn't use the platform.

So rather than criticise the perpetrators your defending their right to harass...

Yes it's nonsense not alternative.

listermint wrote: »

Absolute nonsense viewpoint

The only people who would advocate such nonsense would be out their throwing such abuse or supporting those that do.

Ok it's a nonsense idea according to you.

Thanks.

listermint wrote: »

Ya I'd expect that opinion from you tbh.

Why should anyone be harassed with death threats to themselves and or their family off a platform which they use to engage with their voters by the dregs of society hiding behind stolen avatar photos and made up names.

If you actually read what I said, there is no excuse for the abuse.

You don't like alternative views is your problem.

hotmail.com wrote: »

To reduce the abuse. Plenty of politicians don't use social media and fare just fine.

Absolute nonsense viewpoint

The only people who would advocate such nonsense would be out their throwing such abuse or supporting those that do.

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Why should they?

To reduce the abuse. Plenty of politicians don't use social media and fare just fine.

hotmail.com wrote: »

While not excusing any of the abuse, surely politicians could leave Twitter if they are getting a lot of abuse daily?

Ya I'd expect that opinion from you tbh.

Why should anyone be harassed with death threats to themselves and or their family off a platform which they use to engage with their voters by the dregs of society hiding behind stolen avatar photos and made up names.

Tell me how

Twister2 wrote: »

Why not

Its a choice to put yourself out there online

Because that is excusing ignorant behaviour. We, as a society should be pushing that unacceptable behaviour is called out as unacceptable, not that you either like it or clear the room.

Should someone with say 1,000 followers who enjoy their posts shut down their account because they get abusive behaviour from 5-10 people?

Absolutely not.