Domestic Politics

[Shahanga]

3 hours ago, Tesla said:

The senate voting reforms looks pretty damn dodgy tbh. Coalition and Greens basically teaming up to ensure:

1. Greens will always win Senate seats.

2. ALP is unlikely to ever win a senate majority and has to rely on deals with the Greens.

3. Nationals have lost any hope of ever being anything more than a division of the Liberal party.

4. Minor parties can't win Senate seats even though they had like 30% votes at last senate election. Isn't the whole point of the senate to be proportionally representative?

 

The senate voting system really isn't so broken that such drastic measures are needed, only questionable senator being elected was Ricky Muir, the rest actually had solid amounts of votes and the whole point of the Senate is to be proportionately representative. The fact is, you could argue that the current system results in too few minor party seats, rather than too many, as minor parties had a higher proportion of votes than the senate seats they won.

I really fail to see how this is in the best interests of Liberal voters as well, sure it helps the Liberal party win seats and the Coalition to control the senate for a long time to come, but it also ensures the Greens are a permanent 3rd party and moves the whole political spectrum further to the left now that the ALP will be forced into a more significant alliance with the Greens in the future.

Ideally they should be looking to destroy the Greens rather than helping them and instead eliminating minor parties that (now that PUP is dead) will mostly be right-leaning parties anyway.

PS Nick Xenophon is a flog whose just mad he can't win a bet and reads too many conspiracy theories.

 

Another interesting tesla take.  I'd like to look at the numbers in detail to see who actually would have been elected if preferences exhausted at 6.  You could dig out the Electoral Commission figures but they don't show how many preferences they've been through (ie is it more than 6?), if you get what I mean.  Could probably figure it out I suppose if you were diligent enough and had insomnia........

I do think its better for democracy if people direct their own preferences, thats why, I, bloody minded that I am, vote below the bloody line, just so I can exercise my democratic right  (The missus thinks I'm mad and whinges about how long I take, but then she makes up for it by talking to friends for seemingly hours).  

The assumption though that the libs and greens expect to win from this is fair enough.  Can't imagine either would support it if they didn't. 

[Tesla]

3 hours ago, Shahanga said:

Another interesting tesla take.  I'd like to look at the numbers in detail to see who actually would have been elected if preferences exhausted at 6.  You could dig out the Electoral Commission figures but they don't show how many preferences they've been through (ie is it more than 6?), if you get what I mean.  Could probably figure it out I suppose if you were diligent enough and had insomnia........

I do think its better for democracy if people direct their own preferences, thats why, I, bloody minded that I am, vote below the bloody line, just so I can exercise my democratic right  (The missus thinks I'm mad and whinges about how long I take, but then she makes up for it by talking to friends for seemingly hours).  

The assumption though that the libs and greens expect to win from this is fair enough.  Can't imagine either would support it if they didn't. 

Well the problem is that preferences won't be exhausting at 6, they could be exhausting after 1 in many cases, after all people are forced to turn up so choosing the easiest option is hardly unlikely plus most people are used to only putting 1 number on the senate paper. The result of which will be that only the Coalition, ALP, Greens, and Nick Xenophon will get elected in the future. Which of course makes the Greens and Nick Xenophon very powerful people going forward. The Coalition is banking on the fact that this makes it easier for them to get a senate majority, I'm under the impression that in the future if they win the election, even by a small margin, then it's extremely likely that they will have a senate majority as well.

So it seems that going forward the scenario is: if the Coalition win then they have unabated power even if it is a slender win, basically making having a second house pointless, and if the ALP win then the Greens hold the balance of power. TBH I'm not a huge fan of one party having a senate majority, but up until now it only happens if one party wins the election by a lot, and in that case it seems fair and an accurate reflection of the people's will,. Whereas, going forward, for the Coalition that will no longer be the case, and for the ALP it would probably have to be a huge landslide (not that I can be bothered working it out, it might even be pretty much impossible).

There are many many ways the issue of gaming the preference system could have been addressed, but the Liberals and Greens have designed a system to suit there needs (which is to be expected), but it's clearly less democratic then the current system and not in the spirit of how our democracy is supposed to work.

[Shahanga]

I actually think the best thing would have been if the senate was just abolished. The senate was devised to represent the states, but it never has. 

I would prefer the government to implement their policies as they see fit and at the next election face the verdict of the electorate. So if they didn't like what happened well they get a chance to change direction and on the other foot the elected government gets the opportunity to do what they said they would.

It would also mean some party hacks would actually have to get jobs.

[NewConvert]

51 minutes ago, Shahanga said:

I actually think the best thing would have been if the senate was just abolished. The senate was devised to represent the states, but it never has. 

I would prefer the government to implement their policies as they see fit and at the next election face the verdict of the electorate. So if they didn't like what happened well they get a chance to change direction and on the other foot the elected government gets the opportunity to do what they said they would.

It would also mean some party hacks would actually have to get jobs.

I don't mind the senate - I recall Joh Bjelke-Petersen and what he did. Actually, it was the Victorian ALPs long standing policy to abolish the Vic Upper House (which back then was even worse than the senate) but during the Joh years the policy was dropped by all factions. The senate has become a working house of review and if you play close attention you will see that right up to Abbot it did a reasonable job.

The senate allows voters to have it both ways if the premise is that voters vote for political parties (there are exceptions but by and large this holds true). First it allows the voter to elect a party to govern and then allows the voter to put a soft brake on the government by not giving the government the senate. This means that the policies get double scrutiny and the edges are removed by compromise.

The best example of a policy that was not scrutinised properly was the Military Courts introduced by Brendan Nelson and that policy had unanimous support. The downside is that some policies are best fully implemented rather than hobbled by compromise - can't think of any example for this situation because that would always depend on your political leanings. However I think that this small drawback is a small price to pay for the advantages that the senate brings.

 

[cadete]

1 hour ago, NewConvert said:

I don't mind the senate - I recall Joh Bjelke-Petersen and what he did. Actually, it was the Victorian ALPs long standing policy to abolish the Vic Upper House (which back then was even worse than the senate) but during the Joh years the policy was dropped by all factions. The senate has become a working house of review and if you play close attention you will see that right up to Abbot it did a reasonable job.

The senate allows voters to have it both ways if the premise is that voters vote for political parties (there are exceptions but by and large this holds true). First it allows the voter to elect a party to govern and then allows the voter to put a soft brake on the government by not giving the government the senate. This means that the policies get double scrutiny and the edges are removed by compromise.

The best example of a policy that was not scrutinised properly was the Military Courts introduced by Brendan Nelson and that policy had unanimous support. The downside is that some policies are best fully implemented rather than hobbled by compromise - can't think of any example for this situation because that would always depend on your political leanings. However I think that this small drawback is a small price to pay for the advantages that the senate brings.

 

 

Agreed - The Senate does not serve its initial purpose but it serves a purpose... and FWIW I would have given the Joh example as well to demonstrate such a point.

[Tesla]

5 hours ago, NewConvert said:

I don't mind the senate - I recall Joh Bjelke-Petersen and what he did. Actually, it was the Victorian ALPs long standing policy to abolish the Vic Upper House (which back then was even worse than the senate) but during the Joh years the policy was dropped by all factions. The senate has become a working house of review and if you play close attention you will see that right up to Abbot it did a reasonable job.

The senate allows voters to have it both ways if the premise is that voters vote for political parties (there are exceptions but by and large this holds true). First it allows the voter to elect a party to govern and then allows the voter to put a soft brake on the government by not giving the government the senate. This means that the policies get double scrutiny and the edges are removed by compromise.

The best example of a policy that was not scrutinised properly was the Military Courts introduced by Brendan Nelson and that policy had unanimous support. The downside is that some policies are best fully implemented rather than hobbled by compromise - can't think of any example for this situation because that would always depend on your political leanings. However I think that this small drawback is a small price to pay for the advantages that the senate brings.

 

I also agree, hence why I see these senate voting changes as an issue.

[Tesla]

Possibly the best thing you will see in Australian politics:

 

[Shahanga]

Yep. Joh got shit done. Instead of just talking about it. Thats what I mean.

Having lived under Joh for many years I can honestly say it was the best thing to ever happen to Queensland (went from a backwater to an economic force). You guys knocking it listen to too many leftist jounos.

[jw1739]

2 hours ago, Shahanga said:

Yep. Joh got shit done. Instead of just talking about it. Thats what I mean.

Having lived under Joh for many years I can honestly say it was the best thing to ever happen to Queensland (went from a backwater to an economic force). You guys knocking it listen to too many leftist jounos.

Couldn't agree more. Always remember his standard phrase - " Don't you worry about that."

[Dylan]

4 hours ago, Shahanga said:

Yep. Joh got shit done. Instead of just talking about it. Thats what I mean.

Having lived under Joh for many years I can honestly say it was the best thing to ever happen to Queensland (went from a backwater to an economic force). You guys knocking it listen to too many leftist jounos.

Lol

[hedaik]

Home sick and watching the Royal Commission with Pell. Finding it pretty fascinating watching the tactics the prosecutors use to try and get Pell stuck in a corner, with Pell handling everything smoothly. Hes breaking down a bit though over the meeting with the Bishop about Ridsdale. 

Edited March 1, 2016 by hedaik

[thisphantomfortress]

@cadete @kingofhearts thoughts feelings and emotions so far?

[cadete]

2 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

@cadete @kingofhearts thoughts feelings and emotions so far?

That none of the evidence has proved anything like the three other fucken times... illustrating the point why it was not necessary for Pell to come to Australia.

What will be interesting will be if our forum's favourite Sectarian Tsar will rock up himself at the Gimp one day to introduce himself to AC as he seemed so eager to do the other week.

[thisphantomfortress]

1 minute ago, cadete said:

That none of the evidence has proved anything like the three other fucken times... illustrating the point why it was not necessary for Pell to come to Australia.

What will be interesting will be if our forum's favourite Sectarian Tsar will rock up himself at the Gimp one day to introduce himself to AC as he seemed so eager to do the other week.

Yea been following at work the last couple of days, nothing new really so far. Feel bad for the victims for obvious reasons but also the fact that I guess some of them seem to have gone in expecting something that will never be forthcoming. There won't be a smoking gun from either side.

[cadete]

9 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Yea been following at work the last couple of days, nothing new really so far. Feel bad for the victims for obvious reasons but also the fact that I guess some of them seem to have gone in expecting something that will never be forthcoming. There won't be a smoking gun from either side.

Well at least the "Serial Unelectable Nobodies" on Twatter and Facebook get a good old week at bagging out Catholics for a noble cause...

Edited March 1, 2016 by cadete

[thisphantomfortress]

11 minutes ago, cadete said:

Well at least the "Serial Unelectable Nobodies" on Twatter and Facebook get a good old week at bagging out Catholics for a noble cause...

Speaking of those types one of their hollier-than-thou favourite daughters has been fighting the good fight.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/sarah-hansonyoungs-travel-budget-blows-out-to-15000/news-story/8661d6a9dede7f4ec63d71e712dc4ddb

Green's MP fiscally irresponsible, who'd have thought.

[cadete]

2 minutes ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Speaking of those types one of their hollier-than-thou favourite daughters has been fighting the good fight.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/sarah-hansonyoungs-travel-budget-blows-out-to-15000/news-story/8661d6a9dede7f4ec63d71e712dc4ddb

Green's MP fiscally irresponsible, who'd have thought.

Reminds me of the end of a particular Orwell Novel.

[hedaik]

1 hour ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Yea been following at work the last couple of days, nothing new really so far. Feel bad for the victims for obvious reasons but also the fact that I guess some of them seem to have gone in expecting something that will never be forthcoming. There won't be a smoking gun from either side.

Cant see anything coming out, there were a couple of what I thought to be 'gotcha' moments from the prosecutors where they used his own words against him (particularly around his memory of his meeting with the Bishop around moving Ridsdale around) but Pell always managed to defend himself pretty well. Came across odd that Pell said he had no memory at all of the meeting, but he remembered that paedophilia wasn't mentioned. Prosecutors tried to pin him on it but couldnt. 

I personally find it hard to believe that Pell didnt know (or at least heard a rumour) about Ridsdale and the 14 yo boy living with him as so many people around him knew about it, but its also possible he didn't know. No idea how secretive this kind of stuff was in those days. 

As far as travelling to Australia, it seems to me Pells at a disadvantage by being overseas as hes having to answer questions at midnight while everybody else is nice and fresh at 10am. 

 

I wish all court cases were televised on the internet, perfect viewing for when having a sickie. 

Edited March 1, 2016 by hedaik

[kingofhearts]

7 hours ago, cadete said:

That none of the evidence has proved anything like the three other fucken times... illustrating the point why it was not necessary for Pell to come to Australia.

What will be interesting will be if our forum's favourite Sectarian Tsar will rock up himself at the Gimp one day to introduce himself to AC as he seemed so eager to do the other week.

So i'm going to make a 50 minute trip into the city to lets be honest not the greatest pub in the world to tell two cunts who clearly don't care for me the exact same thing i've already posted on here? Great. Fuck the only time i even go near the pub is sometimes on derby day, if i'm around sure we can have a rigorous debate about the issue but why the honest fuck would i go there otherwise? Esepecially for yourself? 

To Mr.Itakemyinternetargumentsseriously i don't know why you always keep saying "meet me at the pub" "say it to me at the pub" blah blah blah crap what fucking difference does it make? Is it a threat? Will you, ayecee and all the other members of Dets naughty boy crew rock up and beat me up if i was to bag Catholics in front of you? 

Hate to tell you at the end of the day mate your not that special. Even though you were probably raised in toorak, had smoke blown up your ass the whole life, the whole world doesn't revolve around you sorry.It would probably explain why every single one of your posts comes off as you acting like a condescending asshole, do you think you're better then all of us? srs question. Whats it like living of mummy and daddys inheritance?

As tempting as your invitation is to come to the imp i'll have to decline sorry, got a lot of  better things to do then meet strangers in real life over fucking internet arguments for Christ sakes lol. So yes you win this time mate, you're a tough mofo bro! 1-0 to the det! Maybe ayecee can give you a reacharound to celebrate this glorious victory?

P.S: Love the Tsar nickname mate! Kaiser was getting a bit stale, looking forward to your reply mate!!!!!!!

 

[Embee]

[Tesla]

[n i k o]

dp

Edited March 1, 2016 by n i k o

[n i k o]

Edited March 1, 2016 by n i k o

[cadete]

10 hours ago, kingofhearts said:

So i'm going to make a 50 minute trip into the city to lets be honest not the greatest pub in the world to tell two cunts who clearly don't care for me the exact same thing i've already posted on here? Great. Fuck the only time i even go near the pub is sometimes on derby day, if i'm around sure we can have a rigorous debate about the issue but why the honest fuck would i go there otherwise? Esepecially for yourself? 

To Mr.Itakemyinternetargumentsseriously i don't know why you always keep saying "meet me at the pub" "say it to me at the pub" blah blah blah crap what fucking difference does it make? Is it a threat? Will you, ayecee and all the other members of Dets naughty boy crew rock up and beat me up if i was to bag Catholics in front of you? 

Hate to tell you at the end of the day mate your not that special. Even though you were probably raised in toorak, had smoke blown up your ass the whole life, the whole world doesn't revolve around you sorry.It would probably explain why every single one of your posts comes off as you acting like a condescending asshole, do you think you're better then all of us? srs question. Whats it like living of mummy and daddys inheritance?

As tempting as your invitation is to come to the imp i'll have to decline sorry, got a lot of  better things to do then meet strangers in real life over fucking internet arguments for Christ sakes lol. So yes you win this time mate, you're a tough mofo bro! 1-0 to the det! Maybe ayecee can give you a reacharound to celebrate this glorious victory?

P.S: Love the Tsar nickname mate! Kaiser was getting a bit stale, looking forward to your reply mate!!!!!!!

 

I mention The Pub line a bit because I stand by my record as not being an Internet Warrior and that what I will say on the Internet is what I say in person and I don’t need an army of PPL around me to do either, several PPL will back this up, including those who hate me. (It’s the main reason they do hate me and even I consider at times a massive character flaw of mine.)

It is like how when we had our stupid bet last Season… did I pay you mate in RL?

Do I consider myself better than you?

Well considering you are not prepared to the same and have decided instead to back down from the statements you made whilst still dishing out a ton of backhanded internet comments based on presumptions… Yes I do.

FWIW I am from West Brunswick and not Toorak so don’t make assumptions about family who had me very young and worked their arses of to spend every dollar they had so they could send myself and my sister to good schools  (And mine was in Toorak) because they valued Education above everything else.

I am fucken proud of my parents for making such a sacrifice for me and you are right in that these days they live a more comfortable life due to hard work. However, they have never given me inheritance to live off or ever blown the wind up my arse so don’t have a fucken go at them because you have run at things to have a go at me for… 

PS: Kaiser and Tsar not only mean the same thing but they derived from the exact same word... Caesar.

Edited March 1, 2016 by cadete

[sheepdog]

So det, you honestly believe, like swear on your grandparents grave type shit, that this devious prick had absolutely no knowledge of the rock spiders he was hiding and looking out for within his organisation? 

We all know you're "qualification" on this issue, I seem to recall you have mentioned that you are catholic yourself once or twice, let me tell you, and this is fact, my aunty was raped as a 17yr old by a catholic priest, father Whelan I believe. My oldest cousin is a result of it for fucks sake.

All the survivors are asking is for an acknowledgement of the fact that certain cretins within the catholic Church used the cover of the church to commit their sick crimes against the unprotected children. 

Like the apology to the stolen generation, Kevo himself didn't do the crime, he at least had the decency to apologise for past errors.

That's all they want. 

To say that he knew nothing of the allegations is just as much bullshit as a bloke who died on the cross, moved some big rock and reappeared 3 days later. 

Nothing personal man, it's just frustrating when people are blinded by continuous utter bullshit.

 

[AyeCee]

Just to clarify a few things:

- I'm defs not Catholic
- I absolutely hate kiddie fiddlers
- I don't hand out reach arounds for simply winning an internet battle; you have to earn those.

I'm all for bringing the church to account for the terrible acts that were committed. I will also concede that I have only been half interested in this issue, as it doesn't register as a passion of mine. Therefore I know that I will be incorrect about a couple of points.

However, my main concern with this whole ordeal is that I feel the anger is being completely misplaced. As far as I am aware, Pell isn't under suspicion of assault himself is he? So can anyone here, without looking them up, list the names of the priests who are actually guilty? (looking at you Ceasar).

I understand that as a person of leadership, Pell deserves scrutiny, but unless there is concrete evidence that he went out of his way to cover up the acts of lower ranked officials (which hasn't been shown what, 4 times now?), then he only can be labelled as a potentially shady character, rather than the devil incarnate, which is the current narrative. If he was to apologise tomorrow, would everyone then move on to the actual criminals?

Even then, when it comes to an apology and adequate compensation, I would be more inclined to go after the organisation itself, rather than a singular individual within it.

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by AyeCee

[tomby]

Ayecee is a cunt

[Tesla]

2 hours ago, AyeCee said:

Just to clarify a few things:

- I'm defs not Catholic
- I absolutely hate kiddie fiddlers
- I don't hand out reach arounds for simply winning an internet battle; you have to earn those.

Am I the only one who doesn't even remember how you got involved in all of this?

 

2 hours ago, AyeCee said:

I understand that as a person of leadership, Pell deserves scrutiny, but unless there is concrete evidence that he went out of his way to cover up the acts of lower ranked officials (which hasn't been shown what, 4 times now?), then he only can be labelled as a potentially shady character, rather than the devil incarnate, which is the current narrative. If he was to apologise tomorrow, would everyone then move on to the actual criminals?

Even then, when it comes to an apology and adequate compensation, I would be more inclined to go after the organisation itself, rather than a singular individual within it.

 

I honestly have never paid attention to any of this stuff previously, and wouldn't be paying attention to the current media stories either except for the fact Cad made a big deal of it which got me kind of interested, but my understanding is that the issue is whether he knew what was going on and didn't do anything about it, thereby allowing it to continue to happen. Which would be a serious offence in my opinion and in many other people's opinion as well, and possibly illegal as well. Hence why all the questioning is about whether he knew or not. So it's not even about covering it up (though if that was the case it's obviously worse).

 

Edited March 2, 2016 by Tesla

[cadete]

3 hours ago, sheepdog said:

So det, you honestly believe, like swear on your grandparents grave type shit, that this devious prick had absolutely no knowledge of the rock spiders he was hiding and looking out for within his organisation? 

We all know you're "qualification" on this issue, I seem to recall you have mentioned that you are catholic yourself once or twice, let me tell you, and this is fact, my aunty was raped as a 17yr old by a catholic priest, father Whelan I believe. My oldest cousin is a result of it for fucks sake.

All the survivors are asking is for an acknowledgement of the fact that certain cretins within the catholic Church used the cover of the church to commit their sick crimes against the unprotected children. 

Like the apology to the stolen generation, Kevo himself didn't do the crime, he at least had the decency to apologise for past errors.

That's all they want. 

To say that he knew nothing of the allegations is just as much bullshit as a bloke who died on the cross, moved some big rock and reappeared 3 days later. 

Nothing personal man, it's just frustrating when people are blinded by continuous utter bullshit.

 

I will make this quick you can look up the articles to verify as such:

1. Pell has acknowledged their were Crentins since the 1990's and put a compensation system in place to help victims.

2. Pell has apologiaed on behalf of the church numerous times as has more than one Pope.

3. Pell has acknowledged past Bishops did a terrible deed in moving Priests... He disliked his Melbourne predecessor Archbishop Little because of this fact.

4. Many of the high profile victims you have seen on TV not only have already received the above things years ago but most have received compensation in once case it was $850,000 as it should have been... If not more but they could not have accepted and and gone to civil court for more if they felt they should receive more.

5. Nobody will ever prove that Pell did anything perverted himself, you have to be very blind on the issue to think as such. (Not saying you are).

6. The only thing people are trying to prove is if Pell heard about certain cases in certain meetings years ago... Where he was not in high enough position to cover things up anyway.

[thisphantomfortress]

7 hours ago, GreenSeater said:

I have tried to stay out of this discussion because of my connection to it, however I feel like this debate is starting to get senselessly heated and frankly I don't want to read about it any more than I have to. As somebody who has actually given evidence at the royal commission I would say that I am probably the most qualified person to talk about this on here. Personally I think all this stuff about Pell is crap. Its just a routine questioning, likr they've done with hundreds of other church officials and victims. However, as he is particularly well known, high ranking, and refused to return to Australia for medical reasons, the media has turned all its focus on him and everyone has responded by doing the same. His testimony is considered such a big deal because of his position, and it probably is a big deal. I don't know a lot about what went on in Pell's parish as I'm not from that part of the state, so I can't say for certain that he has anything to hide, and I also can't say for certain that he is innocent. If it turns out to be true that he helped move the sick fuckers who committed the acts then by all means he should be condemned. But until its proven he shouldn't be hung out to dry the way he currently is. This is an unnecesary distraction from the rest of the commission and could harm it in the long run if this trial by media continues. It certainly doesn't help us victims to see it on every tv station and on the front of every newspaper every single day. So kingofhearts stop trying to bait Cadete and Cadete stop threatening to fight kingofhearts over your religion as that's certainly not a good look. Kingofhearts is right, the Catholic church has a fair bit to answer for, and in time I'm sure everything will come to light, however Cadete is also right in that condemning a whole religion and everyone that is a part of it because of the actions of some vile old men who represent, in reality, a tiny percentage of the religion of millions is the wrong way to look at it, especially since it places the blame on people other than the scum that actually committed the acts. 

 

So can we all please just get along and agree that pedophiles are cunts? Thanks!

Your balanced and reasoned arguements aren't welcome here!

[GreenSeater]

4 hours ago, thisphantomfortress said:

Your balanced and reasoned arguements aren't welcome here!

Apologies mate, it wont happen again

[cadete]

Just now, GreenSeater said:

Apologies mate, it wont happen again

FWIW I didn't want to fight the bloke I was just calling him out as Internet Warrior which was shown as correct in his response.

[Luke]

Mainstream media continuing their witch hunt against pell and the church. Wake me up when it's over 

[hedaik]

1 hour ago, Luke said:

Mainstream media continuing their witch hunt against pell and the church. Wake me up when it's over 

Maybe just stay sleeping for 5 years to be safe

[kingofhearts]

8 hours ago, cadete said:

FWIW I didn't want to fight the bloke I was just calling him out as Internet Warrior which was shown as correct in his response.

Look i'm sorry, i know finding out who and who isn't a key board warrior on here is a tough job, don't strain yourself too hard doing it.

But i think @GreenSeater has summed up things pretty well. Do i have more things to say about the issue? (esepcially with the events occuring over the last few days) absofuckingloutely but is it going to lead to a happier/more contructive forum? Nope. So i'll take a back seat on this one for now. Take a like as my peace offering to you <3

Love, Caesar

P.S. I'm now more interested anyway in finding out how to earn a reach around @AyeCee Does it involve shouting beers? Help me @tomby?

 

Edited March 3, 2016 by kingofhearts

[GreenSeater]

12 hours ago, cadete said:

FWIW I didn't want to fight the bloke I was just calling him out as Internet Warrior which was shown as correct in his response.

Yeah fair enough, but I don't know you irl, you could be a complete violent nutter for all I know, however I doubt it haha

[cadete]

12 hours ago, kingofhearts said:

Look i'm sorry, i know finding out who and who isn't a key board warrior on here is a tough job, don't strain yourself too hard doing it.

But i think @GreenSeater has summed up things pretty well. Do i have more things to say about the issue? (esepcially with the events occuring over the last few days) absofuckingloutely but is it going to lead to a happier/more contructive forum? Nope. So i'll take a back seat on this one for now. Take a like as my peace offering to you <3

Love, Caesar

P.S. I'm now more interested anyway in finding out how to earn a reach around @AyeCee Does it involve shouting beers? Help me @tomby?

 

Oh god are u are one of those PPL who tag multiple PPL on a post on FB on what u think is a great "In Joke" only to never recieve a response from your supposed best mates?

As that would make sense TBH...

[thisphantomfortress]

2 hours ago, cadete said:

Oh god are u are one of those PPL who tag multiple PPL on a post on FB on what u think is a great "In Joke" only to never recieve a response from your supposed best mates?

As that would make sense TBH...

Pretty much me

[kingofhearts]

7 hours ago, cadete said:

Oh god are u are one of those PPL who tag multiple PPL on a post on FB on what u think is a great "In Joke" only to never recieve a response from your supposed best mates?

As that would make sense TBH...

They all said they were too busy to respond.....

You reckon their not really my friends?

Will you be my friend?

[cadete]

19 minutes ago, kingofhearts said:

They all said they were too busy to respond.....

You reckon their not really my friends?

Will you be my friend?

No.