*** Official*** South Africa in England 2017

[Burgey]

By the same token I don't understand why you're so exercised about people's reaction to that post.

The line you're taking here is one that's open to anyone to take about any post which someone else finds artless/ distasteful/ offensive/ wrong/ stupid.

We all have our particular bug bears, many of which are based on our own lived experiences. I don't think you (generic you, not you in particular) are in a position to somehow say people should or shouldn't get pissed at something someone posts.

 

[cnerd123]

By the same token I don't understand why you're so exercised about people's reaction to that post.

The line you're taking here is one that's open to anyone to take about any post which someone else finds artless/ distasteful/ offensive/ wrong/ stupid.

We all have our particular bug bears, many of which are based on our own lived experiences. I don't think you (generic you, not you in particular) are in a position to somehow say people should or shouldn't get pissed at something someone posts.

I just wrongly assumed it seems that they are getting pissed at it because they don't understand what it is that Gnske does. A lot of us find him hilarious. We get what his humour is. I'm worried people aren't understanding his humour, are taking him literally, and are now going to campaign for him to be infracted/banned/kicked off the forum, when the reality is he's harmless and actually quite a lot of fun and I don't feel he should be stifled or gotten rid of.

However 91jmay claims he does understand Gnske's humor, and is still offended. Now I'm just confused and want to understand why. How. Like, I can't wrap my mind around it. Doesn't mean he shouldn't be offended, or that he doesn't have the right to express his feelings. I just literally don't get it. Doesn't make it wrong. Just makes me confused.

 

[cnerd123]

I do have him on ignore thanks all the same, but someone quoted him.



Not really sure why there isn't anything wrong with them, are we allowed to call people "******s" or "cripples" or "*******s".

Gawd, you say it's funny and interesting, but it really ****ing isn't, it's boring reductive ****ing annoying and just again REALLY REALLY REALLY BORING.

**** me this entire "reaction to political correctness gone mad" thing is the most tedious aspect of the internet nowadays, you can just say what you like no matter how lacking in insight, genuine wit, trying to offend clearly, and people will back it up.

it really isn't that hard to do, I mean it's actually incredibly easy it doesn't take a genius, it takes a poorly moderated forum to allow it to happen.

Trolling is clearly against the rules, he trolls as acknowledged by mods on here, if he has been given a warning about the Cerebal palsy gags, oh and how hilarious they are, I haven't seen it, I think he should TBH. Mocking a physical affliction just hasn't been funny since the 70s, have no idea why some young people seem to think the most reductive, old-fashioned and quite frankly stiflingly dull languague of a previous time has sddenly become wildean wit.

In my opinion your all unconsciousable ****wits, with little or no moral compass,for doing it or thinking it's fun. and you pretty much are what is going wrong with this world, in your slimy nihilism of bland offence as some kind of political or amusing statement, hateful beyond any word, totally intellectually and socially bereft, your interactions in life will end up causing you to die hideously and unloved.

Sorry that's just my unmoderated un-PC view, I'm a card aren't I? No I'm not actually i'm just going down to your level, and I'm probably feeling bad about myself with every billious word I write, whats the ****ing point?

Anywhoo, well done the beard....

like this. Grecian thinks what Gnske is trying to do is rile up people and offend them The posting equivalent of "It's just a prank bro" youtube videos. They feel his end goal is to post things that piss people off, and then laugh at the fact that they're pissed off.

I don't see Gnske's posts like that at all. Not even in the slightest. I can't wrap my head around how someone can.

 

[Burgey]

I'm not going to try to speak for 91JMay here, and dog knows if I did he'd probably get the ****s with me because it's not like we have a great history. But to give you an example drawn from my own set of circumstances, Mrs Burgey has a younger sister who has profound cerebral palsy. Mrs Burgey is about as knockabout a person as you could find and loves a joke as much as anyone, but if someone does an attempted gag with reference to a disability she sees red over it. It's not because the person making the gag is a **** or is trying to be a ****, it's because from her own experience she finds it offensive and it's something close to her own heart.

If someone makes a gag like that and it falls flat with Mrs Burgey, I don't think it gives everyone else in the room the right to turn around and question the whys and wherefores of her feelings on it. And tbf, if someone did try to find all that out from her, they'd probably end up a molten, blubbering mess on the floor, because when she gets the ****s, Mrs Burgey does not miss.

 

[cnerd123]

I'm not going to try to speak for 91JMay here, and dog knows if I did he'd probably get the ****s with me because it's not like we have a great history. But to give you an example drawn from my own set of circumstances, Mrs Burgey has a younger sister who has profound cerebral palsy. Mrs Burgey is about as knockabout a person as you could find and loves a joke as much as anyone, but if someone does an attempted gag with reference to a disability she sees red over it. It's not because the person making the gag is a **** or is trying to be a ****, it's because from her own experience she finds it offensive and it's something close to her own heart.

If someone makes a gag like that and it falls flat with Mrs Burgey, I don't think it gives everyone else in the room the right to turn around and question the whys and wherefores of her feelings on it. And tbf, if someone did try to find all that out from her, they'd probably end up a molten, blubbering mess on the floor, because when she gets the ****s, Mrs Burgey does not miss.

following on with this example - if the person making the joke has no idea of this situation, would you then as a group turn to that person and condemn them for making the joke? Especially if, as a group, you are aware that this person likes dark humour? Would you then kick them out and blame them for being an awful person?

I mean, I wouldn't. It's a misunderstanding. A joke didn't land. The person making it didn't do it to cause offence, but offence was caused. Doesn't mean he's a bad person. Doesn't mean Mr Burgey needs to grow a pair and learn to take a joke. Just means a quiet word needs to be had, and you move on and avoid jokes on that topic in that company in the future.

Right?

 

[Burgey]

It depends on the person and your take on them I suppose. It seems you have a different take on Gnske than 91JMay and Grecian do. If the person cracking the joke is someone who has a tin ear to people and to things in general, you're less likely to take a laid back approach to them than you otherwise would.

Somethings cannot and will not have an arbitrary, all-encompassing logical line in them. It's just the way it is. The other week you were trying to extrapolate from people a reasoned and logical basis for them liking or not liking a sport/ sportsperson in the "Love their game, Hate their Personality" or whatever it's called thread. You can't always reduce inherently subjective things like that. They're not always capable of being reduced like that.

 

[cnerd123]

I mean if at the end of the day the argument isn't logical but a simple "I don't like the vibe this sport/this person/this poster gives me", then surely that is simply your problem and your problem alone right?

Like, we can't ban Gnske simply because a couple of posters have a bad gut feeling about him? You can't legislate against a sport or an idea because you simply have bad feelings for it?

Society needs to function on logical, rationally made decisions. I don't care to convince people to change their gut feelings. I care when they try to act as though those gut feelings can somehow logically be defended and explained, and thus then be used to form a stance/opinion on a topic, which then leads to campaign against something. You can't do that. That isn't right.

You can't ban Gnske just because you don't like him, just like I can't get Pratters banned just because I don't like him. Sometimes you put up with people you don't like who don't do anything wrong. Your gut feeling isn't enough to justify denying their right to use the forum and be part of the community.

 

[Burgey]

I'm not suggesting he should be banned, but if people think the post in question warrants reporting, they'll report it and the mods will deal with it. There's always a subjective element to whether a post is banned/ reported or whatever. It's up to the moderators to deal with reporting of things.

 

[cnerd123]

I'm not suggesting he should be banned, but if people think the post in question warrants reporting, they'll report it and the mods will deal with it. There's always a subjective element to whether a post is banned/ reported or whatever. It's up to the moderators to deal with reporting of things.

So basically what I said

If you don't like his post then report it

So wise Burgey.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Nah thats BS.

In real life I base a lot of my humour on what you're describing........rule No 1 is to know your audience. This **** just doesn't work on the internet.

Ftr, this is just a reminder that this same forum reacted with glee at this post :

I imagine Kuggeleijn would have a lot of run out problems when his partner says no but he hears yes

I for one, thought it was hilarious and one of the funniest things I've ever seen on here despite it's dark subject matter. But people here seem to draw the line at what's offensive by whether they find it funny or not. That's my only problem with everyone's reaction. If you find NZT's post hilarious but want Gnske banned for a cerebral palsy joke then, sorry, imo you're being massively hypocritical. It's not actually offensive to you, you just don't find it entertaining by your own admission:

Indeed, my main problem with this phenom is not that it's shocking (FFS I listened to Derek and Clove when I was 13) is it's become so dreadfully cliched and dull. What do they get out of this mindless repition of one incredibly shallow and meaningless ideal?

Yeah I found that funny when I was 13, shame you boys haven't moved on. We all understand what he is trying to do, we just think he's a unfunny dick.

Honestly pretty amazed you think this is some highbrow humour you have to "unveil". There is literally a bloke in every pub who plays this act, before going home to his empty flat and passing out on sofa. We've all seen it 100x of times before.

And really, not being entertaining, or being dull isn't worthy of outrage atleast imo.

 

[Burgey]

So basically what I said.

Not really.

 

[Gnske]

This may well be just one of the most ridiculous passages of thread activity I've ever seen. And all over a base-level post from me that showed as much effort as it did knowledge. I'm tempted to somehow soothe those who clearly have a very large axe to grind against me, even if I think you should all be united in your condemnation of everything I am. But mending fences seems fruitless given a certain contingent seem to hate my guts almost feverishly. I won't name that contingent to keep this amiable but they love colonialism and exiting things.

People put me on ignore and still have no restraint to ignore me in spite of this?

 

[vcs]

Ftr, this is just a reminder that this same forum reacted with glee at this post :



I for one, thought it was hilarious and one of the funniest things I've ever seen on here despite it's dark subject matter. But people here seem to draw the line at what's offensive by whether they find it funny or not. That's my only problem with everyone's reaction. If you find NZT's post hilarious but want Gnske banned for a cerebral palsy joke then, sorry, imo you're being massively hypocritical. It's not actually offensive to you, you just don't find it entertaining by your own admission:





And really, not being entertaining, or being dull isn't worthy of outrage atleast imo.

He used the ph34r smiley. Everyone knows that using the ph34r smiley makes everything ok.

I also found that joke very funny, FWIW.

 

[honestbharani]

Gnske is so misunderstood


At the risk of unveiling what it is that Gnske does and why he is funny (to me atleast) - is that he doesn't make these jokes because he thinks they are funny. He makes them because he knows it is extremely inappropriate, bottom of the barrel, and quintessentialy not-funny. He's playing a role. A character. He's trying is absolute hardest to be the make the most dire posts he can get away with as an ironic joke. A parody of exactly the kind of people you all despise.

And in between all that, he mixes in some absolute gems. Some great puns, some actual witty insights, and some absolutely cutting sarcasm.

He's funny the way Borat is funny. Or the Eric Andre show is funny. Or Ken M is funny.

I'm disappointed more of you can't see that.

To be completely honest, most of the trolls you scared off here (as you keep reminding us ) could as well be playing characters too. That is just a lame excuse. This is not a RP forum or group. And honestly, if the character is not agreeable enough, he is eligible to the same punishments the rest of us "real people" are.

 

[harsh.ag]

[h=2]They are some of the worst batsmen I've ever seen play Test cricket.[/h]- Damien Fleming is not overly impressed by certain members of England's top order

 

[Burgey]

That actually means something, considering he bowled to England in the 1990s.

 

[wpdavid]

That actually means something, considering he bowled to England in the 1990s.

Indeed. tbh we'd gladly take Atherton, Stewart or Butcher in our top order right now.

Actually Stewart, if not keeping wicket, would be a massive upgrade. Throw in Thorpe at 5 and our batting would look OK.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

That actually means something, considering he bowled to England in the 1990s.

Was he not watching the Aussies of the mid 80's? similar level to be fair.

 

[Burgey]

He would have been watching but understandably been utterly spellbound by the majesty of TOTAB.

 

[wpdavid]

he would have been watching but understandably been utterly spellbound by the majesty of totab.

tot?