Bowie wrote: » The difference being our country was divided without our consent and the Irish in the occupied portion of the Irish province of ulster being treated as less than second class in the faux democracy that followed.We are more akin to post war Germany.
Bubbaclaus wrote: » I have Facebook's own comments to back up my claim, saying at least 1 in 20 profiles on their website are fake. Pretty clear cut and straight from the horses mouth. Feel free to ignore that though and claim I have "nothing to back it up". Trumpian logic on show. I don't even know what you have to gain from defending facebook here. Enjoy the rest of your evening.
Bubbaclaus wrote: » Francis, you are moving goalposts here. I will pander it once and then leave you at it. Facebook themselves claim they have an issue with fake accounts, so it absolutely beats me why you are taking the opposite side here. Literally makes no sense Francis. I would see a profile with either no profile picture (or else a profile picture of a slogan rather than any actual image), combined with either a fully blank or fully private profile as being fake, or at least fully anonymous to allow them to say whatever they want. If you want to see any specific examples yourself, you will find plenty of them on any article relating to Covid-19. Can't believe I pandered to that request, but there you go. If you are going to continue to claim Facebook doesnt have any fake account issue, then you will need to find someone else to debate that with. I'm out.
Really? If you read the comments on facebook on any article at all you will notice that a large chunk of the comments are coming from anonymous accounts
FrancieBrady wrote: » I didn't claim any such thing...I asked you to back up this comment. YOU made the claim, you back it up. You claimed 'any' article on COvod would prove this. Here is an article on Covid...can you point to the 'large chunk of the comments' that are from anonymous accounts?https://www.facebook.com/irishtimes/posts/10157997947126158
RandomViewer wrote: » It's much higherhttps://www.statista.com/chart/20685/duplicate-and-false-facebook-accounts/
Bubbaclaus wrote: » You are the one making claims that go against Facebooks own information here. You should be backing your own claims up, as you are the one making outrageous claims that go against even Facebook's self analysis. 2 seconds on that link and I see Stuart Kelly and Liam Logan as clear ones. You can find the rest yourself I'm sure, it not difficult. Not going to pander to your ridiculous demands on this any further. Feel free to take the last word.
rdwight wrote: » *mod snip* Bowie, on the other hand, has entered a late contender for worst historical analogy of the year award.
blanch152 wrote: » I had it down for most hysterical historical analogy of the year, but it’s a close run thing. There is a sense out there that the government are doing a good job managing COVID-19 far better than our neighbours, managing Brexit and generally running things competently. That leaves the perennial protestors in a pickle.
RandomViewer wrote: » Any views on fiddling councillors ?
blanch152 wrote: » Which Sinn Fein councillors are fiddling expenses? This is the Sinn Fein thread.
RandomViewer wrote: » But you've avoided the 2 where it's mentioned, I suspect theres councillors from all parties involved
Kraftwerk wrote: » You suspect SF councillors are fiddling expenses? Nasty business isn't it. Although nothing new to SF. They've been fiddling expenses for years in the North claiming millions in expenses from Westminster.
FrancieBrady wrote: » Expenses for work carried out as elected public reps which goes on. Are you saying that the authorities are ignoring criminality?
Kraftwerk wrote: » What work is that? Speaking and voting in Parliament to represent their constituents? No. They're happy to waste the money on SF days out to promote the party but refuse to actually take the seats and carry out their duties as elected MPs. No surprise if they're grabbing any free money they can during lock down too tbh.
RandomViewer wrote: » Guessing you and Blanch have the full list beside you, the lack of enthusiasm from the frap room says it all, as I said earlier name,shame ,sack and jail
FrancieBrady wrote: » Why don't you research it? You might find out the answer to why there are no criminal charges for 'fiddling' their expenses. You might also find out that there is more to being a public representative than vows of allegiance and speaking in Westminster.
Kraftwerk wrote: » I doubt I'd find out much more than I already know.
Kraftwerk wrote: » You're the one who brought it up suggesting that SF councillors were fiddling expenses. So by all means name and shame.
marieholmfan wrote: » Hi Blanch -- Why did you describe Leo Varadkar as coming from a very traditional family when excusing Varadkar's homophobia?
walshb wrote: » Leo's homophobia? What's this about?
McMurphy wrote: » I think it's in reference to Leo initially being against same sex marriage, and while obviously not a serious suggestion that he's "homophobic" - it's presumably pointing out how the same poster it was directed at, has and does make numerous and blatant faux homophobic insinuations and accusations about things, and Leo's speech would likely be classified as such using their earlier standards at classifying something someone says as them being "homophobic".
FrancieBrady wrote: » blanch was refusing to accept that Leo, along with decades of governments were being homopobhic in refusing rights. He refused to accept that nobody needed to 'come out' to stand up for what was right when he made the excuse that Leo's tardiness was down to the pressures he felt and the 'traditional family' background he came from. He never explained what he meant by that.
blanch152 wrote: » Is this the Sinn Fein thread? Some deflection this morning, must be more bad stuff about Sinn Fein coming out for you guys to go all-out on a poster about an off-topic issue.
