527 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

C’mon now, we might disagree with each other but that doesn’t mean we should tolerate lowering our standards.

Opinions can be conveyed in a respectable manner. Let’s stick with that.

[vortoozo]

There will be a pro-carriage rally tomorrow at 5:30pm at City Hall.

Destination Greater Victoria cancelled a previously-scheduled event that was to take place at the same time so that members could attend, given the importance of the carriages to the local tourism industry. Their position on the proposed ban is here: https://www.tourismv...ge_industry.pdf

Edited by vortoozo, 22 May 2019 - 10:41 PM.

[Mike K.]

Our Facebook poll has 2.1k respondents and 75% are in favour of keeping the carriages.

[29er Radio]

Maybe the question is would you say the things you have written in this thread to his face. 

To be fair (to me), I'm not really prone to calling people rude names when I post on VV. I don't personally believe in giving politicians any quarter though, and my posts do reflect that personal sentiment.

I may be excessively opinionated on some issues, but I rarely resort to blatant name calling.

 

What does rub me the wrong way though, is being told that the policy of the forum in question is that nobody can call politicians any rude names, a sentiment I'm not personally prone to abide by.

 

The actual posts we're referencing didn't bother me in the slightest. I understand clearly what somebody means when they call a politician a"dolt", and I equally understand the line being drawn between the two points of the act of making a motion at a Council meeting to ban horse drawn carriages, and suggesting that the person who made the motion might choke on the horse meat of the horse they're responsible for seeing to the slaughter as a final result of their original motion.

I've no issues with either comment, and understand with crystal clarity where such comments come from, and equally where they're intended to go.

 

It's a mountain out of a molehill really, and "dolt" and "choke on horse meat" really don't represent much of an insult at all, and are a relatively benign way of expressing dissatisfaction with a politicians highly personal stamp on everything he says ... that is things he says while taking a bi-weekly pay cheque comprised of 100% tax dollars supplied solely by residents of the COV.

[spanky123]

What does rub me the wrong way though, is being told that the policy of the forum in question is that nobody can call politicians any rude names, a sentiment I'm not personally prone to abide by.

 

Some of our local politicians prefer if you are rude to them on social media, gives them an excuse for cutting off communications and shutting down social media accounts.

 

I don't think that is what anyone is hoping for however. I think it is fair to criticize policy but personal attacks are unwarranted and do not add value to the conversation.

[Rob Randall]

Thing is, we see our councillors in the neighbourhood--in the grocery store, the coffee shop, a community event. It's silly to have one set of behaviour used when hiding behind a keyboard and another when running into someone face-to-face.

 

You'd think you could face someone in person and explain why you think banning horses is a bad idea and do it in a civilized manner without resorting to hurtful schoolyard taunts.

 

An observation I've had is that people that grew up in a truly loving environment seldom have the need to call people idiots as adults.

Edited by Rob Randall, 23 May 2019 - 08:40 AM.

[RFS]

I wouldn't have a problem telling off politicians in person. like this guy

https://youtu.be/sLuv6qeSMyU

I am still seething over John A MacDonald and if the opportunity ever presented itself I'd make my displeasure known. Anything less and you're basically complicit in the act.

Edited by RFS, 23 May 2019 - 09:01 AM.

[Nparker]

...I am still seething over John A MacDonald...

Dude he's been dead for 128 years. Time to move on. 

[dasmo]

Thing is, we see our councillors in the neighbourhood--in the grocery store, the coffee shop, a community event. It's silly to have one set of behaviour used when hiding behind a keyboard and another when running into someone face-to-face.

 

You'd think you could face someone in person and explain why you think banning horses is a bad idea and do it in a civilized manner without resorting to hurtful schoolyard taunts.

 

An observation I've had is that people that grew up in a truly loving environment seldom have the need to call people idiots as adults.

I agree except for the observation part. If the target has been deemed milkshake worthy then the hate is approved. No more need for civil debate at all...

[Mike K.]

Civil debate is great.

Until antifa shuts down a venue where it’s scheduled to occur.

Or where professors organize a protest to stop their students from hearing what they perceive to be views contrary to their own, and therefore equal to hate speech.

Or elected officials openly criticize the presence of someone with whom they disagree, and demand their public engagement be curtailed or cancelled.

If that fails they lob milkshakes.

[dasmo]

Civil debate is great.

Until antifa shuts down a venue where it’s scheduled to occur.

Or where professors organize a protest to stop their students from hearing what they perceive to be views contrary to their own, and therefore equal to hate speech.

Or elected officials openly criticize the presence of someone with whom they disagree, and demand their public engagement be curtailed or cancelled.

If that fails they lob milkshakes.

For sure. You learn from history. You don't want "conservatives" like Lougheed coming in and wrecking the status quo....

[Jason-L]

Civil debate is great.

Until antifa shuts down a venue where it’s scheduled to occur.

Or where professors organize a protest to stop their students from hearing what they perceive to be views contrary to their own, and therefore equal to hate speech.

Or elected officials openly criticize the presence of someone with whom they disagree, and demand their public engagement be curtailed or cancelled.

If that fails they lob milkshakes.

Better milkshakes than bullets.

[Mike K.]

Better milkshakes than bullets.

Aka, assault is funner than tolerance.

[Jason-L]

Aka, assault is funner than tolerance.

Dirty clothing is better than being run over by a car or shot, yes.

[Mike K.]

A gun shot is better than a nuke.

Where should we draw the line?

[RFS]

Also the concern is that generally people don't go straight to bullets. It all starts somewhere. What we need to be able to do is recognize where it's going too far and put a stop to it. As a society we do this really eagerly and aggressively when it comes to the right. Not so much when it comes to the left going too far.

[dasmo]

Nonetheless, the milkshake is ineffective as you can see from the polls. You don't convince or convert a single person with intimidation. You only galvanize them. 

Edited by dasmo, 23 May 2019 - 12:38 PM.

[dasmo]

Also the concern is that generally people don't go straight to bullets. It all starts somewhere. What we need to be able to do is recognize where it's going too far and put a stop to it. As a society we do this really eagerly and aggressively when it comes to the right. Not so much when it comes to the left going too far.

By the way, to give clarity to my earlier reference, it was Peter Lougheed who put an end to the Sexual Sterilization Act that reigned for 43 years in Alberta! "During the time the Sexual Sterilization Act was in effect, 4,800 cases were proposed for sterilization in the Province of Alberta, of which 99% received approval." Lougheed was a Conservative.... Maybe not so evil after all?  https://en.wikipedia...erilization_Act

[jonny]

WTF...

[Mike K.]

Just think of it this way.

 

With every 'milkshake assault' at the hands of an imbecile fuelled on by an army of imbeciles, 10,000 average, pragmatic and socially conscious left-leaning individuals are so put off by the actions of their political peers that they transition further to the right.

 

With every violent protest against a speaker, or assault of a person 'on the right' merely for their opinion on a matter, 10,000 average, pragmatic and socially conscious left-leaning individuals are so put off by the actions of their political peers that they transition further to the right.