CD, I'd agree with you were it not for the initial... and continued... reaction over on PM.

I posted something... lord knows if I can remember what, now... and tigga came in, guns ablazing, all full of the same baseless accusations, out of context quotes and mudslinging.
That was his INITIAL action.

That wasn't holding up a mirror to me in any way shape or form.
There was nothing in his post that even remotely resembled the way I post or the content thereof.
I don't see this as a reaction. This is all action.

"Holding up a mirror", to me, and correct me if I'm wrong, would be an exercise in showing others how their style of posting, or content thereof, is viewed from the other side.
Showing the other side of the coin, as it were.
While I disagree with many here, I don't see ANYTHING in tigga's posts that could be considered remotely resembling this.
Other than Sal, who, I think we can agree, has been completely written off, no one here posts anywhere NEAR the level of racist hatred that he does.
No one here rewrites what people say like he does. No one here twists what was said into something vile like he does.
No one here comes in guns a-blazing like he does. No one here behaves even remotely like he does, to the level of racism and hatred that he does.

"I mentioned Sal to illustrate the point that one form of racism, while decried, was not done so anywhere to the same extent that Tigga's actions were"
I understand your point, but, unfortunately, it's comparing apples and oranges. Sal was a coward who would post something offensive, then disappeared.
Tigga, on the other hand, posts something offensive, then reinforces it, over and over, changing his point when it was proved wrong, yes, but he was constant. He kept posting, ad nauseum, the same thing over and over, at one point on Facebook, getting into a fight with himself on another account, just to keep the "conversation" in the foreground.

Both are racist pigs, but their modus operandi was different, thus, can't really be compared.

The closest to a mirror, as far as I can see, would be Guilden and Sandgrownan, both vehemently against the opposing party, but saying similar things, all the while defending with an offense.

Crimson Dynamo

Thanks for clearing that up ... so tigga doesn't answer your questions either ... fortunately he will answer mine once in a while ... which I appreciate.

Sadly if only more posters were pro-active instead of reactive in their postings it would raise the level of discourse on this (and other) sites.

Darkside

 

 

Piglet

Don't be laughing at me or rolling your eyes......you used to hand out the spoons.....

Clutch that straw.   


If you are going to disregard conventional definitions and substitute your own willy-nilly ideas, you can make any argument sound convincing.  Too bad we already understand the meaning of the terms you are using.  If you want to make a difference with the written word, you'll need to rethink that strategy.  As it is, I've now tuned out your ramblings for what they are.


No, a retraction is distinct from a correction, but you'd need a dictionary to understand the subtle difference. 

With your two IDs combined you've still only been here for half the time the site has been around. 

I was not "disingenious" [sic] to say you are a Jonny come lately.  Your ignorance belies the time you've spent here. 

You still haven't managed to spell your word of the day right; if you are going to continue to insult me here on my website, at least show you are capable of learning the simple things. 

If  we raise a collection to get you a copy of the Oxford English Dictionary as a going away present, would you prefer the paper or electronic edition?

Okay boys ... not exactly at your best today are you?

Crimson Dynamo ... too wide a brush was used here for the fine "cuts" that this job required.

Mike ... remember it is quality not quantity.

As you were then ... a good eve to both of you.

Okay ... [after some relection and consideration given to whether to explain the issues here further ... Darkside decides to wade into these murky waters.]

The charge is institutional racism.

The defences are:

1.  This site is not institutionally racist ... well then I must defend every post from every poster here ... waters I am unwilling to defend ... some posters (of all colours) have made racist statements here ... and yes they have not been called on it.

2.  I (personally) am not a racist ... a self-serving defence ... its not me its someone else ... simply put this is not a defence that directly answers the charge.

3.  No grounds to answer the charge ... again not tenable in face of some posts that exist here forever.

4.  Silence ... the road most posters have choosen ... this only strenthens the charge laid ... silence = agreement.

5.  Derailment ... well live on the fresh waters of Egypt if you must ... you know de-Nile.

6.  Trolling, baiting, cajoling ... well how did you think we ended up here in the first place?

In the end there is no defence to the charge nor is there viable grounds for the charge to stick ... battle semantics all you like ... its not gonna convince any third party ... the charge is invalid and the defences untenable ... retract and retreat ... it you want to change this site then post your well-reasoned views ... [No! ... Don't do it Darkside ... darn little voice in my head ... shush now] ... call a spade a spade and lets get on with it.

Darkside.