Who’s Been Cancelled??

[imtommygunn]

They're gone it seems. I don't think this is moderated any more.

[restorepride]

God is a male-created personification of Good, evil being personified by the d-evil.  The rest is just made up to control you.  Personally I was always more scared of the good guy!!   But indoctrination is hard to question when it starts even before you were born, with that original sin.  You can work it out though (unless you still believe in Santa?!).  But in South Derry, to question your faith was also to question your allegiance to community, nationality, culture, identity, language etc.   Not true!  I cut out the religious baggage long ago and much happier for it.  Most people viewed the sketch as satire and funny until the Archbishop rallied support - the last kick of catholic 'influence' maybe?   But to feel insulted that someone's questioning the scientific evidence for an immaculate conception?  Surely, by Jaysus, we have to be more grown-up than that?

[Lar Naparka]

They're gone it seems. I don't think this is moderated any more.

Mod3 is still active as a poster.

[JoG2]

They're gone it seems. I don't think this is moderated any more.

Mod3 is still active as a poster.

Tell me Sid and Angelo are not creations of the forum owners... Have to be. No-one has that much time on their hands (even during a pandemic) to be that repetitive and wordy!

[Lar Naparka]

They're gone it seems. I don't think this is moderated any more.

Mod3 is still active as a poster.

Tell me Sid and Angelo are not creations of the forum owners... Have to be. No-one has that much time on their hands (even during a pandemic) to be that repetitive and wordy!

Sorry, I just did  a re-check and Mod3 hasn't posted since last May.

[Lar Naparka]

They're gone it seems. I don't think this is moderated any more.

Mod3 is still active as a poster.

Tell me Sid and Angelo are not creations of the forum owners... Have to be. No-one has that much time on their hands (even during a pandemic) to be that repetitive and wordy!

Sorry, I just did  a re-check and Mod3 hasn't posted since last May.

February actually. Think he got cancelled.

Nah, his last post was in May. I have had a few chats/slags with him over the years since he first PMed me for a chat and he used his Mod3 handle from time to time.

[Rossfan]

They're gone it seems. I don't think this is moderated any more.

Mod3 is still active as a poster.

Tell me Sid and Angelo are not creations of the forum owners... Have to be. No-one has that much time on their hands (even during a pandemic) to be that repetitive and wordy!

They gave to be.
No real people could be so one dimensional as those.

[Lar Naparka]

Nope, his last post was in February. He was last online in May.

I'm not going to push a point with you - the fact is that he, and it's a he, is no longer active.
The individual in question once PMed me using his poster handle- which was fair enough and we  stayed in periodic touch for a few years.
Then one time, inadvertently or otherwise, he contacted me as Mod3.
You seemed convinced that Ziggy Ego was in fact Mod3 and I asked him of I should PM you to put you out of your misery and he shot back saying he didn't give a f**k if to you knew who he was or not.
He made the reasonable point that , while he saw no point in advertising who he was, he had no problem admitting his identity if he had to.
Edit: You are right , his was last active in May. I may have said his last post was in May.

[Main Street]

Nope, his last post was in February. He was last online in May.

I'm not going to push a point with you - the fact is that he, and it's a he, is no longer active.
The individual in question once PMed me using his poster handle- which was fair enough and we  stayed in periodic touch for a few years.
Then one time, inadvertently or otherwise, he contacted me as Mod3.
You seemed convinced that Ziggy Ego was in fact Mod3 and I asked him of I should PM you to put you out of your misery and he shot back saying he didn't give a f**k if to you knew who he was or not.
He made the reasonable point that , while he saw no point in advertising who he was, he had no problem admitting his identity if he had to.
Edit: You are right , his was last active in May. I may have said his last post was in May.

I know we arsed around with the implication for months, I thought it was all a total písstake  but in good spirit. In other words, among the least likely posters to be  Mod3 was Ziggy Ego.

[sid waddell]

Discussions about mods always seem to come back to the who

[Lar Naparka]

Sid, I just read the first sentence in your reply and I gave up all hope of having a sensible discussion with you.
This is what I am referring to:
"I don't see any connection between the murder of Manuela Riedo and an RTE sketch either - but then I don't see how your previous post was anything to do with the issue at hand."

Then, in the one I am quoting  now you came up with this:

"Isn't that the same logic that holds "what did Manuela Riedo expect to happen when she walked along that deserted path beside the railway line"?

If you can't see a contradiction here, you are gone past redemption as I know it.
I know you are a Dublin supporter and logic rests lightly on the shoulders of those who support the Blues but howe you can see a connection between the rape and murder of a defenceless young woman and an unfunny and to many offensive poorly-writtten script from RTE beats me.
Bridget and Eamon is a work of art when compared to this dollop of horseshit and talking about the right of anyone to exercising freedom of speech at taxpayers' money is a travesty of justice.
So David Quinn and the Iona Institute are shrieking about something or other. So what? Them hoors have turned shrieking into an art form. But, by all accounts, RTE have received a huge number of complaints from the general public and have reacted accordingly.
I really can't understand what you're complaining about.

I don't see a connection between Manuela Riedo's murder and the RTE sketch and already said so - so why are you saying I do?

This was the question I orginally asked you

Remember 2015 when David Quinn and the I Own Her Institute were all over #jesuischarlie and "free speech"?

Why not now?

You responded with

If I were to walk up to the local bully and tell him he's a thundering bollox, the least I could expect is a belt on the nose or a kick up the hole. Telling him it's my right to offend anyone I want to will probably do no good.

But this reply made zero sense - it was a bizarre tangent - and didn't answer my question at all

Nevertheless - this bizarre tangent showed some troubling opinions on your part - you created a hypothetical scenario which showcased George Hook style victim blaming tendencies

Unprompted, seemingly from nowhere, you appeared to state that victims of assault bear some responsibility if they are assaulted - but they don't

That's why I referenced Manuela Riedo - because if one is to follow this bizarre George Hook-esque logic, one could hold that Manuela Riedo bore some responsibility for being attacked and murdered - but obviously she didn't

Anyway back to the sketch - which is what I thought we were supposed be talking about before you took us off on that tangent

I thought the sketch was both funny and well observed - it satirised religious belief about the so called "Immaculate Conception" - where Mary was impregnated with the zygote of the son of God, through no wish of her own - and compared it against current norms, as well as the #metoo movement

It was designed to offend religious sensibilities, to offend a belief, which is absolutely fair game - Father Ted did the same thing, and we all love Father Ted

I mean, in the same way, one could satirise holy communion as cannibalism - actually one doesn't have to - according to Catholic teaching itself, holy communion as given out at mass is cannibalism - as you're supposed to be eating the actual body of Christ

According to Catholic teaching itself, at mass the priest is supposed to be drinking the actual blood of Christ - so isn't this vampirism? Yes? That's what drinking the actual blood of others is

You didn't think the sketch was funny - so what - that's not a basis for an apology

The point is - why should RTE or Aengus MacGrianna apologise for what was a legitimate piece of satire?

The self proclaimed Catholic religious right have styled themselves as so called "free speech warriors" - up to and including apologism for and outright defences of many things most reasonable people would consider hate speech - they seem to be just fine with abhorrent, extreme right-wing politics worldwide

Yet now they're up in arms over this sketch - which shows them up as total and utter hypocrites who do not believe a word they previously said

It shows them up as holding moronic opinions - they think it's fine to utter hate speech against others - but it's apparently off limits to legitimately satirise the Catholic right's religious beliefs?

These are not legitimate opinions - they are moronic ones and deserve to be torn apart

This sketch wasn't hate speech - it was satire of actual religious teaching, satire of a legend from the bible

I don't see anything remotely wrong with that

Stand up comedian Kevin Bridges has based a sketch around the same thing satirised in the RTE sketch - and very funny it is too - in my opinion of course

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9B9UHlg3ig

Sid, I don't see us reaching a mutual understanding anytime soon and, as I don't want to keep knocking on a closed door repeatedly, I'lli finish this discussion with this post.

At a conservativwe estimate, you have been outvoted by 5,000 to one at the very least.
RTE has said ""The formal complaints received by RTÉ are being entered into our complaints system and will be responded to in accordance with the relevant statutory process."

Headed "'God' comedy sketch on RTE provokes 5,000 complaints"
https://extra.ie/2021/01/07/news/irish-news/rte-god-sketch-player
Carries a report that began:
"Aired on the RTE New Year's Eve Countdown Show, the fake news skit depicted God as a rapist, and prompted more than 5,000 complaints."

What appears to be a matter of free speech to you is apparently incitement to hate to 5,000 others.
Does majority rule or not?
I don't see much point in continuing a point picking exercise since the rules of logic don't apply to you but I'll sign off with a few of the more noteworthy examples.
If you recall, you stated that there should have been no apology and I asked you why not.
I stated ,"The sole object of the exercise was to offend the religious beliefs of possibly the majority people on the island. By all accounts, the show had no cultural or artistic merit and caused extreme offence to the general public ...

Your bizarre reply was to accuse me of using Georg Hook logic and for a leap of imagination it is hard to beat this: Isn't that the same logic that holds "what did Manuela Riedo expect to happen when she walked along that deserted path beside the railway line"?
Why exactly is that supposed to mean???
AS for David Quinn and the I Own Her (Iona?) Institute and Charlie Hebdo stickers, I had already pointed out that the magazine's editor had already paid with his life for exercising his right to free speech and in so doing, five of his colleagues died along with him. A young gendarme was murdered also and scores of churches were razed to the ground in Ghana (?)   
What the editor may have supposed as a legitimate freedom of expression was taken by Muslin fundamentalists as an incitement to hatred with calamitous results for thousands of innocent people.
All the #jesuischarlies in the world cannot gainsay that.
At best they signalled to millions of fundamentalists that the West  was impotent to retaliate and, worst of all, seemed to imply that western society condoned the insult to Allah.
And #jesuischarlie?
An  exercise in futility at its worst.
That's where my allusion to being assaulted by the local bully enters the picture.
In short, it's alright to express your personal opinion but be wary of the response you may get.

[gallsman]

At a conservativwe estimate, you have been outvoted by 5,000 to one at the very least.
RTE has said ""The formal complaints received by RTÉ are being entered into our complaints system and will be responded to in accordance with the relevant statutory process."

Headed "'God' comedy sketch on RTE provokes 5,000 complaints"
https://extra.ie/2021/01/07/news/irish-news/rte-god-sketch-player
Carries a report that began:
"Aired on the RTE New Year's Eve Countdown Show, the fake news skit depicted God as a rapist, and prompted more than 5,000 complaints."

So nobody, absolutely nobody other than Sid disagrees with the decision here? Or are you just posting, either deliberately or through ignorance and incompetence, misleading waffle by counting "votes" from one source to bolster your arguement? OK Donald.

[imtommygunn]

I see a massive furore of the cancelling of that Parler social media platform by AWS(aka Amazon cloud essentially).

[Lar Naparka]

At a conservativwe estimate, you have been outvoted by 5,000 to one at the very least.
RTE has said ""The formal complaints received by RTÉ are being entered into our complaints system and will be responded to in accordance with the relevant statutory process."

Headed "'God' comedy sketch on RTE provokes 5,000 complaints"
https://extra.ie/2021/01/07/news/irish-news/rte-god-sketch-player
Carries a report that began:
"Aired on the RTE New Year's Eve Countdown Show, the fake news skit depicted God as a rapist, and prompted more than 5,000 complaints."

So nobody, absolutely nobody other than Sid disagrees with the decision here? Or are you just posting, either deliberately or through ignorance and incompetence, misleading waffle by counting "votes" from one source to bolster your arguement? OK Donald.

Read hat I wrote and include the links I referred to. I have said before that I have not come across a single mention of anyone making a complaint about the apology being issued.
So, AFAIK, the count is 5,000 or thereabouts versus sid.
For the record have you any credible sources to suggest that sid has more support than I have been able to find.
Aso for the record, I did not depend on one source to arrive at my conclusion. I based what I said on what I read in the INdo, RTE, The Sun and extra.ie and I know there are a long list of others if you care to google for "Angus mac Grianna apology."

[J70]

I see a massive furore of the cancelling of that Parler social media platform by AWS(aka Amazon cloud essentially).

And not an iota of self reflection from them on WHY they've been booted off by Amazon, Apple and Google.