Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

It's abuse and discrimination according to someone's place of birth.

It is not directed against the people of NSW or QLD in any way. Why? Because its a disgraceful and low act. You think it's fun. Others don't. That's all that maters.

In the workplace the definition of bullying does not dependent on the act itself but whether the target finds it offensive. If they voice their concerns and ask for it to stop it must. Otherwise it is workplace bullying.

oh grow up you utter shelia , take your skirt off & put some pants on
I have never met such limp wristed attitudes ... its typical giggleball .... singlet wearing lady boys & its on dislay here

we're not in a work place ...
its a forum
its a fight club
man up you whimp..............

I'm sure youll adjust to arguing without abuse.

You can do it. :D

cos789 wrote:

Thre are many reasons for wanting to remove abuse.
There are legal implications.
To most it's socially unappealing.
It is totally destructive in having any meaningful discourse.

IMO it seems strange we're debating the acceptance of abuse. It should be a no-brainer.
In reality we are debating the level of accepetance of social discourse.
There are some of us that would like to zero tolerance to abuse and especially personel abuse.
There are some of us that are totally repulsed by some of the language and terms used here.
There are a lot of us that find the repetitive nature of most threads totally tiresome.
There are some of us that would prefer that TFC was run along debating lines.
The reality is that this isn't a debating club (unfortunately) neither is it the cesspool that is L.U.
The common ground is that we want a relaxed atmosphere but we don't want personel abuse, racial abuse, filth and constant repetition.
To those who say that attitude is stifling, I say you know nothing.
It is quite possible to be totally vitriotic within the confines of the rules of debating.
It just takes a little more effort than posting multiple emoticons.

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie said he doesn't have any problem with the term

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie said he doesn't have any problem with the term

Yes, I don't have a major problem with term. That said, majority will rule. The poll is not looking good for the term staying. Just saying.

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie said he doesn't have any problem with the term

Yes, I don't have a major problem with term. That said, majority will rule. The poll is not looking good for the term staying. Just saying.

cos789 wrote:

Beaussie wrote:

Raiderdave wrote:

Beaussie said he doesn't have any problem with the term

Yes, I don't have a major problem with term. That said, majority will rule. The poll is not looking good for the term staying. Just saying.

Well you cannot accuse Beaussie of being autocratic can you ?

Raiderdave wrote:

xman is a dictator already

NSWAFL wrote:

Nor do they tolerate any sort of objection .

NSWAFL wrote:

Why do you think I prefer Olds Park to Kogarah, cos789? (That's the home grounds for St George in the SAFL and the Dragons in the NRL respectively for those who don't know)