The Commons Bar Mk XIV - MHoC Chat Thread Watch

Saracen's Fez
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#41
Report 2 years ago
#41
(Original post by Snufkin)
But the Speaker could have been made OP without deleting my post. My post should have been relegated to #2, but it's just gone.
I didn't think it was possible to insert a post higher up in a thread – aren't they sorted chronologically so the only way is to reassign an existing post?
0
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#42
Report 2 years ago
#42
(Original post by Saracen's Fez)
I didn't think it was possible to insert a post higher up in a thread – aren't they sorted chronologically so the only way is to reassign an existing post?
It is possible, I don't know if STs can do it but certainly SLs can (miser), I believe it's called changing the owner of a thread. Anyway, this may seem like small potatoes but imo deleting posts is unnecessary.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#43
Report 2 years ago
#43
(Original post by Rakas21)
What additional rights do women need?



Corbyn opposed the agreement because it would not lead to a united Ireland. That's a fair reason to deem him a traitor to the United Kingdom.
British governments for thirty years including Thatcher's held talks with the IRA in secret.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#44
Report 2 years ago
#44
(Original post by Bornblue)
British governments for thirty years including Thatcher's held talks with the IRA in secret.
Talking with the IRA is not a problem, supporting them is.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#45
Report 2 years ago
#45
(Original post by Rakas21)
Talking with the IRA is not a problem, supporting them is.
He didn't though. He talked with Sinn Fien, he never did with the IRA.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#46
Report 2 years ago
#46
(Original post by Bornblue)
He didn't though. He talked with Sinn Fien, he never did with the IRA.
You don't seriously believe that Corbyn did not support the IRA?
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#47
Report 2 years ago
#47
(Original post by Rakas21)
You don't seriously believe that Corbyn did not support the IRA?
No.

The biggest issues that effect us on a daily basis are housing, education health, social care etc and they barely get talked about behind people more obsessed with what people were and were not allegedly saying thirty years ago.

Put it this way, I'm far more concerned about the fact our government arms and funds the Saudis than I am about the IRA.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#48
Report 2 years ago
#48
(Original post by Bornblue)
No.

The biggest issues that effect us on a daily basis are housing, education health, social care etc and they barely get talked about behind people more obsessed with what people were and were not allegedly saying thirty years ago.

Put it this way, I'm far more concerned about the fact our government arms and funds the Saudis than I am about the IRA.
Ah, these things may not be individually important but they all paint a picture of a man who is not a credible leader of our country. That is the point.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#49
Report 2 years ago
#49
(Original post by Rakas21)
Ah, these things may not be individually important but they all paint a picture of a man who is not a credible leader of our country. That is the point.
So why does funding and arming Saudi Arabia, a country that commits war crimes, promotes Wahhabism and funds Isis, make someone a credible leader of our country?
0
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#50
Report 2 years ago
#50
(Original post by Bornblue)
So why does funding and arming Saudi Arabia, a country that commits war crimes, promotes Wahhabism and funds Isis, make someone a credible leader of our country?
There's a difference between funding an oil rich state that helps our economic development, and which is officially recognised by the UN; its called pragmatic foreign policy; im sure Mrs May would stop funding the Saudis at the drop of a hat (as would I); but when they are a member of the international community and willing to give us lucrative trade deals, sometimes pious idealism needs to be put on the backburner.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#51
Report 2 years ago
#51
(Original post by Connor27)
There's a difference between funding an oil rich state that helps our economic development, and which is officially recognised by the UN; its called pragmatic foreign policy; im sure Mrs May would stop funding the Saudis at the drop of a hat (as would I); but when they are a member of the international community and willing to give us lucrative trade deals, sometimes pious idealism needs to be put on the backburner.
Is our economic development more important than civilians in Yemen being killed by weapons that Saudi Arabia bought from us?

Is it worth supporting a brutal Islamic dictatorship that actively promotes Wahhabism around the world?

Is it worth in effect indirectly funding ISIS which the Saudis have done?

Not to mention their record on human rights.


It's not good enough to just go 'yeah but economic development'.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#52
Report 2 years ago
#52
(Original post by Bornblue)
So why does funding and arming Saudi Arabia, a country that commits war crimes, promotes Wahhabism and funds Isis, make someone a credible leader of our country?
It makes her realistic.

You find a way to end the UK's dependence on oil and i shall gladly call for May to annex Saudi Arabia and rid the world of their regime.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#53
Report 2 years ago
#53
(Original post by Rakas21)
It makes her realistic.

You find a way to end the UK's dependence on oil and i shall gladly call for May to annex Saudi Arabia and rid the world of their regime.
So our economic interests are more important than not funding Wahabbism?

It's not realistic, it's weak leadership and very unpatriotic.
0
reply
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#54
Report 2 years ago
#54
(Original post by Snufkin)
Where's my post gone?
I changed the OP owner to Petros as is convention for bar threads.
0
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#55
Report 2 years ago
#55
(Original post by The Financier)
I changed the OP owner to Petros as is convention for bar threads.
Yes, but: https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho...0&postcount=42. You shouldn't have deleted the post.
0
reply
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#56
Report 2 years ago
#56
(Original post by Snufkin)
Yes, but: https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho...0&postcount=42. You shouldn't have deleted the post.
I did not delete the post. I changed its owner to Petros and edited the OP to conform with the standard we have for bar threads.
1
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#57
Report 2 years ago
#57
(Original post by The Financier)
I did not delete the post. I changed its owner to Petros and edited the OP to conform with the standard we have for bar threads.
Then it should still be there, only it isn't. Merging two posts and removing my content (which seems to be what you did) is still effectively deleting it. There were other ways to make Petros the OP.
0
reply
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#58
Report 2 years ago
#58
(Original post by Snufkin)
Then it should still be there, only it isn't. Merging two posts and removing my content (which seems to be what you did) is still effectively deleting it. There were other ways to make Petros the OP.
Read my post again. Each post in a thread is registered to a user. By changing the user it is registered to, I have changed the owner from you to Petros.

As a community assistant, you should be aware that any queries you have about this action can be answered in AtCT.
3
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#59
Report 2 years ago
#59
(Original post by The Financier)
Read my post again. Each post in a thread is registered to a user. By changing the user it is registered to, I have changed the owner from you to Petros.

As a community assistant, you should be aware that any queries you have about this action can be answered in AtCT.
Yes, I could ask in AtCT but I'd rather you just undo what you did, make Petros the OP and not remove my post in the process. Is that really asking so much?
0
reply
Airmed
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#60
Report 2 years ago
#60
(Original post by Snufkin)
Yes, I could ask in AtCT but I'd rather you just undo what you did, make Petros the OP and not remove my post in the process. Is that really asking so much?
You can't get the post back.

You were the OP. TF changed the OP from you to Petros. Therefore whatever you posted was under Petros' name. Since what you posted was not the usual format for the OP of the bar thread, TF then had to edit the post to reflect what is needed in the OP. You can't get your post back, simply because of the silly automatic new thread thingy that TSR has set up. That's all there is to it, tbh.
2
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

People at uni: do initiations (like heavy drinking) put you off joining sports societies?

Yes (463)
67.49%
No (223)
32.51%

Watched Threads

View All