In general, I don’t like casting aspersions on people who are simply trying to have a precise and long conversation, but it still amuses me when people who are doing so announce that they will resume the conversation later since it so closely parallels the cartoon.
“Well, some people can tell a joke, some people can’t.”
applause
Good grief. I was fucking supporting you.
I still think you failed internet 101 by not browsing the Wikipedia link that was your top Google result. But yes, someone made a joke that went over your head and it misled you. I didn’t get the joke, either, but yes, i knew the significance of 88 in this context, so i followed the conversation.
I’ll give you an additional bit for free, no need to Google.
This is a nasty comment, suggesting that you are a neo-nazi. The reference is to “14 words”
Mostly it was just poking fun at someone’s ignorance of things this board has been discussing since I got here at the least.
Quite the communicator that you are. That you thought that was a straight answer explains quite a bit. I will now assume that the “some people” that you referred to exist only in your fevered and paranoid imagination.
Like I said, it’s hard to tell if you really are this fucking stupid, or if you are just pretending to be, but in the end, does it really even matter?
So, are you saying that you aren’t going to tell us who these “some people” are?
Talk about avoiding a straight question. You’ve already bragged about being too lazy to click a wikipedia link, your whole reason for all of this is to try to manipulate people into thinking that it’s just fine to drop racial slurs wherever you want and you are straight up lying about knowing “some people”.
Few here have deserved pitting as much as you, you truly are a vile piece of shit, and it is good that you were given the opportunity to demonstrate that for everyone to see.
Post #245:
Are you pointing out that you claimed you were going to turn your attention to other things and people that matter, and then did not, demonstrating that you are a liar?
Post #249:
I don’t see the relevance. Could you explain?
And while you are at it, I’d really like to know about these “some people” that you claim to know so much about.
You know, my first instinct was to create a wiki page to link to some made up examples (“Bury my heart on San Juan Hill” - Franklin D Roosevelt, “You’d be relatively insane not to spend eternity on Hamburger Hill” - Albert Einstein) but then I realized I’m really lazy and this thread isn’t worth half the effort for such a crummy joke.
Damn but he is stupid,
He’s riding his hobby horse again. We are all too stupid to understand what he means. And of course when he uses the N-word (no, no, “niggardly”, not that offensive one that he still believes we must be allowed to say) he will patiently explain to us why it is just silly for us to be offended.
Must be a joy to work with.
Would’ve been nice to have seen this thread before I bothered in the other one.
Don’t pay any attention to me. I’m just a deluded snowflake stalker.
Novelty has the captains of industry, holders of the great offices of state and leading intellectuals of our age sitting at his feet, being instructed how to communicate effectively [in the passive voice].
So this whole thread is happening:
It rapidly becomes the “Novelty Bobble vs Everyone Else” thread so I won’t link to a specific post because there are oh so many of them.
I saw the thread title with 100 unread posts all of a sudden and immediately thought NB White Knight had ridden to the rescue!
And so it was.
I’ve noted it before, but NB reminds me of a lot of old school Southern racists I grew up with. They’d say things like “oh, black people are lazy, but ‘John’ is one of the good ones” but not consider themselves racist because they don’t advocate lynching. Or some such nonsense. I’m sure NB would say their kindly intentions were the important bits. 
Unbelievable.
So … over in the “Four Yorkshiremen” thread, he revealed that he’s actually from the region. That revelation, combined with his frequent dry boasts of acting as an advisor to captains of industry or however he puts it, plus his calmly stubborn adherence to ludicrously antiquated ways of thinking, produced a bit of an epiphany for me.
Basically, Novelty_Bobble is one of these guys.
Every morning, in his cozy cottage, he pours himself a cup of weak and watery yet somehow still bitter brew and takes a seat at his desk, where he powers on the same barely-upgraded desktop computer he’s been using for the last twenty years. “Reckon the morngy buggers’re still arsin’ up the world,” he says to himself as the screen warms up. “so let’s crack reight on.” Then he starts cheerfully typing, pecking away with his pointers, gifting the young and wayward with the benefits of his hard-won wisdom. When he’s done, he sits back, well chuffed with himself, glowing with happy, smug satisfaction, not because he’s made the smallest dent in the foolishness around him but because he’s blissfully confident in his absolute correctness.
His immovable insistence on “intent” being the critical component for judging whether someone’s words can be rightly judged offensive or not is certainly a giveaway, because it’s such old-fashioned thinking. Whatever was said, goes the argument, it wasn’t meant that way, so it obviously can’t be taken that way. Cross the arms, smile beatifically, and that’s the end of it.
What this fails to grasp is that there’s a newfangled way of thinking about these things. It’s not about intent, it’s about effect. Whatever the intent of the words, if they have a certain effect, this is called out. The speaker then has the choice of recognizing the effect and amending himself, out of respect for the other person; his intent not to harm can be concluded from this adjustment.
Or — and this is NB’s position — the speaker can refuse to concede the effect. He insists that whatever the other perceives, his own intent trumps the other’s perception, and should be considered to govern. He does not recognize the inherent bigotry in this behavior, because it doesn’t feel overt, malicious, pointed, in the way he understands racism, sexism, and so on. He fails to understand that this constitutes a more subtle form of bigotry — essentially, a statement of superiority, a downward dismissal of the other person’s point of view, and a refusal to concede that they have any right at all to impinge on the speaker’s authority. You are lesser than me. Your opinion counts for less than mine. I therefore wave away your assertion as irrelevant to me.
TLDR — he’s a reight wanker.
Strangely he reminds me of middle class Brits I’ve encountered (UK middle class = university educated, managerial/professional workers) who are politely racist. They wish they could let their racist flag fly like the working class can, but find it is career limiting to do so.
Though our friend here claims to have found a career in driving out DEI from corporate cultures. Nice work if you can get it, I suppose.
Quick question, I got sick of dealing with him and his trollish dodging of every single thing, so I decided to go with a one month ignore. He hasn’t said a single thing of value, and several self contradictory things in the Clarkson thread.
But this thread came up, and it’s making me wonder if there is any value to the poster worth putting up with? Are they a content master on anything? Because his efforts to defend speak so much to being an entitled ass-hat and devaluing anyone else I’m starting to think it’s no loss to keep it up.