Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Frank Hovis

Offended On Somebody Else's Behalf

Recommended Posts

This has been happening a lot since the rise of Facebook and Twitter. There's some minor incident and people with zero connection get wildly offended by it and without reading more than a one-sided headline start firing off hate-filled messages. Behaving far worse than the original incident, but that's allowed because they're in the right.

Last week it was some poor bloke who wrote a gentle letter to a woman he'd been on a date with saying he didn't want a second date because he only found thinner women attractive. Burn him!!!

Now it's a pub landlady who wouldn't serve somebody. He says because of his medical condition which makes him appear drunk, she says:

However, Ms Stunell has said that she thought he was drunk before even seeing his face as she saw him stumble on the way into the pub, and that was when she looked at the bar staff and told them not to serve him.

She said: "They said 'you've had enough' and he said 'ok' and left."

Ms Stunell, said she has CCTV footage of Mr Barker in the pub, and also claims to have seen several pictures on Facebook of him drinking during the day.

This was the headline story on the local news earlier in the week as people went into full offended on somebody else's behalf (there needs to be a word for that) overdrive and inevitably:

Since the story of the ban on Mr Barker went national, friends of Ms Stunnel say that she has received hate mail and been targetted on social media.

http://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/13420957.Landlady_at_centre_of_pub_ban_disability_row_apologises_but_stands_by_her_decision/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all part of The Programme, Frank :D

Get the rabble obsessed by irrelevant and inconsequential nonsense on their mobile propaganda devices (to which they are permanently plugged in): et voila! Nobody actually gets offended about the really important stuff anymore. They get their 5 minutes of (misdirected) hate every day, post a few vicious (yet ultimately futile) messages to feel like they have some kind of power in the world (and over their own lives), and then default back into passive worker bee mode. Simples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all part of The Programme, Frank :D

Get the rabble obsessed by irrelevant and inconsequential nonsense on their mobile propaganda devices (to which they are permanently plugged in): et voila! Nobody actually gets offended about the really important stuff anymore. They get their 5 minutes of (misdirected) hate every day, post a few vicious (yet ultimately futile) messages to feel like they have some kind of power in the world (and over their own lives), and then default back into passive worker bee mode. Simples.

Good point. Offence-by-proxy (Munchausen Offence) is worryingly similar to the 'Five Minutes Hate' that Orwell described in '1984'. It's like having a lynching party or a public hanging every day, without having to leave the comfort of your armchair.

In fact what Orwell failed to predict was that the telescreens would not be imposed upon the masses, but that the masses would willingly submit to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah!

Five minutes of hate from "1984".

They also had lotteries as a diversion. But nobody you actually knew ever won. Sounds familiar.

Getting with The Programme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People are idiots, always have been. Social media has just given them an opportunity to broadcast that fact to a wider audience than they would have been able to in the past.

The landlady risks losing her licence and getting fined for serving somebody who is drunk or appears to be drunk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's worrying is the way institutions and organisations seem to cowtow to these keyboard warriors.

A simple way to eliminate twitter-storms would be for all organisations to say 'formal complaints will only be considered if they are submitted on a handwritten, signed letter.' It was standard policy for newspapers in the past to never accept letters without a name and address, for good reason.

That would immediately put off most people from pursuing their complaints and they would go back to playing Candy Crush instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been happening a lot since the rise of Facebook and Twitter. There's some minor incident and people with zero connection get wildly offended by it and without reading more than a one-sided headline start firing off hate-filled messages. Behaving far worse than the original incident, but that's allowed because they're in the right.

There's a continuum between solidarity and obsession ....

One out, all out. Hmm, why was the one out? Could go either way.

We must give asylum to refugees. Hmm, why was he at risk at home? 'Cos the authorities there take a dim view of psychopaths who blockade a rival into their house and then torch it?

We must posthumously pardon our hero Alan Turing ... conveniently ignoring the fact that someone who has carnal relations with an under-age person today gets treated much more harshly than he was in his own time.

We condemn the Saudis for forcing their women to wrap up, yet imprison Stephen Gough for failing to wrap up at home. Oh, erm, right, that one's the authorities, not the mob.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose if you treat people like infants then they will behave like infants. There are orthodoxies of thought now and it's only in rare areas that these are challenged.

These are your heroes - worship them

These are your villains - despise them

You may have any opinion as long as it from a pre-selected spectrum of acceptable opinions

The one thing that seems to have gone against this tide is climate change theory. It is taught in schools as fact and anybody who disputed it was a "denier" but now many adults openly question it, including Barak Obama recently wondering why his daughter was not more critical of it. NB - not trying to divert the thread here, it's just one case where the relentless tide of orthodox thought has actually been rolled back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose if you treat people like infants then they will behave like infants. There are orthodoxies of thought now and it's only in rare areas that these are challenged.

All too true in many cases. Still, got to keep people safe. If you don't treat them like infants someone will get hurt and die, do you want to explain it to his kids? The people trotting that drivel out, well, if they get themselves trapped in their own safety fencing I'd just laugh at them for a bit then walk away.

The one thing that seems to have gone against this tide is climate change theory. It is taught in schools as fact and anybody who disputed it was a "denier" but now many adults openly question it, including Barak Obama recently wondering why his daughter was not more critical of it. NB - not trying to divert the thread here, it's just one case where the relentless tide of orthodox thought has actually been rolled back.

Do you think that they debate it because they have issues with the science or because if it's true it threatens their lazy little convenience-obsessed lives? Even when the mob happens to agree with me on something I don't always think that they've reached the same conclusion rationally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All too true in many cases. Still, got to keep people safe. If you don't treat them like infants someone will get hurt and die, do you want to explain it to his kids? The people trotting that drivel out, well, if they get themselves trapped in their own safety fencing I'd just laugh at them for a bit then walk away.

Do you think that they debate it because they have issues with the science or because if it's true it threatens their lazy little convenience-obsessed lives? Even when the mob happens to agree with me on something I don't always think that they've reached the same conclusion rationally.

I think the latter but less in the selfish sense that you're suggesting and more a product of seeing windfarms and solar panels all over the place and seeing this as a despoliation of the planet in itself. Add in higher electricity bills and taxes to pay for it all and the reality hits home to the very people who were accepting it as "fact" ten years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the latter but less in the selfish sense that you're suggesting and more a product of seeing windfarms and solar panels all over the place and seeing this as a despoliation of the planet in itself. Add in higher electricity bills and taxes to pay for it all and the reality hits home to the very people who were accepting it as "fact" ten years ago.

Well I'm with them on having windfarms and solar panels all over the place, just the type of crap that makes me depressed. A solution that fvcks things up like that isn't worth having; it makes rather a mess of some of the few things I find actually make life worth living and quite honestly anyone who doesn't have a problem with them needs their head examining. The money side I'm less bothered about, or would be if the whole business didn't smell far more of tokenism than actually trying to do something.

Most modern attempts at "improving" things have a similar effect, can't stand any of them. Many of them bring us back to the whole population thing too, and why reducing it should be top of the political agenda.

Well, that's a bit off-topic on one of my favourite subjects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah!

Five minutes of hate from "1984".

They also had lotteries as a diversion. But nobody you actually knew ever won. Sounds familiar.

Getting with The Programme.

Steve Hughes - offended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...This was the headline story on the local news earlier in the week as people went into full offended on somebody else's behalf (there needs to be a word for that) overdrive and inevitably:

http://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/13420957.Landlady_at_centre_of_pub_ban_disability_row_apologises_but_stands_by_her_decision/

Otherfended ?

Proxyfended

Proxoffended

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There also seems to be another trait on social media whereby EVERYTHING has to be posted to one of them, overriding any common sense options. Recent examples include:

A girl got a letter delivered to her house but the guy it was addressed to no longer lived there. It was clearly from an older lady telling the guy that she would be at the train station on this day at a certain time and looked forward to seeing him and heading to the certain event that they were attending. So rather than simply put the letter back in a mail box as most people would OR, if she wanted to help, going to the station at the date and time to find the lady, she took a picture of the letter, including all details, and posted it to Facebook to try and find the sender.

Second example was an ID card, I think it was some sort of bank bonus card/student card thing, with a lad's picture, name and address on it, scanned and posted to Facebook. So rather than drop it into the bank, or even a police station, OR take it to the lad's house OR post it, they scanned it and posted it all to Facebook.

Plenty more of those happen week in/week out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose if you treat people like infants then they will behave like infants. There are orthodoxies of thought now and it's only in rare areas that these are challenged.

These are your heroes - worship them

These are your villains - despise them

You may have any opinion as long as it from a pre-selected spectrum of acceptable opinions

The one thing that seems to have gone against this tide is climate change theory. It is taught in schools as fact and anybody who disputed it was a "denier" but now many adults openly question it, including Barak Obama recently wondering why his daughter was not more critical of it. NB - not trying to divert the thread here, it's just one case where the relentless tide of orthodox thought has actually been rolled back.

Actually science in general has taken a hammering in favour of woo. For example, anyone can set themselves up as a nutrition expert - and providing they are thin, attractive and preferably female - they'll attract a following. Subscription to, and knowledge, of all scientific theories has taken a step backwards due to religion, poor education, corporate capture and general growth in individualism (me-ism).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There also seems to be another trait on social media whereby EVERYTHING has to be posted to one of them, overriding any common sense options. Recent examples include:

A girl got a letter delivered to her house but the guy it was addressed to no longer lived there. It was clearly from an older lady telling the guy that she would be at the train station on this day at a certain time and looked forward to seeing him and heading to the certain event that they were attending. So rather than simply put the letter back in a mail box as most people would OR, if she wanted to help, going to the station at the date and time to find the lady, she took a picture of the letter, including all details, and posted it to Facebook to try and find the sender.

Second example was an ID card, I think it was some sort of bank bonus card/student card thing, with a lad's picture, name and address on it, scanned and posted to Facebook. So rather than drop it into the bank, or even a police station, OR take it to the lad's house OR post it, they scanned it and posted it all to Facebook.

Plenty more of those happen week in/week out.

Well she has committed a criminal offence and then advertised the fact on the internet

Interference with mail - Postal Services Act 2000, sections 83 and 84

The Postal Services Act 2000 sections 83 and 84, see Stones 8.24243 and 8.24244, create offences of interfering with mail. Section 83 is aimed at persons engaged in the business of a postal operator and creates an either way offence. Section 84 covers any person and creates a summary only imprisonable offence. Both sections cover intentional delaying or opening of a postal packet and intentional opening of a mail bag.

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/communications_offences/#an08

Let us hope plod have felt her collar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

Sounds like the method my wife employs each time we have an argument. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   59 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.