The Commons Bar Mk XIV - MHoC Chat Thread Watch

Snufkin
Badges: 21
#61
Report 2 years ago
#61
(Original post by Airmed)
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.
Sigh, well in that case can you/TF remove post #2 (or at least the quote). I'd rather not be quoted if the original post isn't there.
0
reply
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#62
Report 2 years ago
#62
(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?
That isn't how the permissions work.
0
reply
Life_peer
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#63
Report 2 years ago
#63
What the heck are you arguing about? :eek:
2
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#64
Report 2 years ago
#64
(Original post by The Financier)
That isn't how the permissions work.
See: https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho...8&postcount=61

(Original post by Life_peer)
What the heck are you arguing about? :eek:
It isn't an argument. :nope:
0
reply
Joep95
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#65
Report 2 years ago
#65
(Original post by Life_peer)
What the heck are you arguing about? :eek:
Snufkin is upset that they made petros op
0
reply
MrDystopia
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#66
Report 2 years ago
#66
(Original post by Snufkin)
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.
For reference, I am now SL of D&CA, and thus, the MHoC too (Joy). So any queries will be dealt with by myself. Everything TF/Airmed have said is correct so far, so again, if there's an issue with moderation, take it to Ask a CT.

I've taken the liberty of editing the post you requested. Hopefully now that stops this bickering, so let's move on from it. At the end of the day, it's just the OP of a thread. Thanks.
3
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#67
Report 2 years ago
#67
(Original post by joecphillips)
Snufkin is upset that they made petros op
(Original post by Life_peer)
So it's true… :facepalm:

I don't know if I should pity him for having mental issues or envy him for having literally no other more important worries.
No. I knew Petros would need to be the OP. I wouldn't have created this thread had it not been for the automatic thread renewal system.
0
reply
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#68
Report 2 years ago
#68
I think enough has been said about this and it has no practical relevance outside AtCT. As MrDystopia says, move on from it please. Thanks.
1
reply
That Bearded Man
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#69
Report 2 years ago
#69
(Original post by Rakas21)
Talking with the IRA is not a problem, supporting them is.
So you condemn the Tory councillor in Croydon then?
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#70
Report 2 years ago
#70
STRONG and stable u turn on social care from the tories.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#71
Report 2 years ago
#71
(Original post by Bornblue)
STRONG and stable u turn on social care from the tories.
If it diffuses the issue then her majority will be very strong and stable indeed.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#72
Report 2 years ago
#72
(Original post by Rakas21)
If it diffuses the issue then her majority will be very strong and stable indeed.
Theresa May's whole pitch has been about how she is a strong and stable leader. Within four days of releasing the Tories manifesto she has backtracked majorly on a key policy. This was after her team denying it would be changed over the weekend.

She has also not said where the funding will come for the new proposal.

This isn't strong and stable, it's weak.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#73
Report 2 years ago
#73
(Original post by Bornblue)
Theresa May's whole pitch has been about how she is a strong and stable leader. Within four days of releasing the Tories manifesto she has backtracked majorly on a key policy. This was after her team denying it would be changed over the weekend.

She has also not said where the funding will come for the new proposal.

This isn't strong and stable, it's weak.
The cap requires no funding since social care is private, the problem with it is that over time as inflation brings the average cost closer to the cap, it will provide a strong disincentive to opening new care homes. It's a bad long term policy.
0
reply
Snufkin
Badges: 21
#74
Report 2 years ago
#74
(Original post by Bornblue)
This isn't strong and stable, it's weak.
It feels like the whole Tory manifesto has been designed to ensure a win, but not a huuuge landslide. Are they that devious? Are they that brave?
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#75
Report 2 years ago
#75
(Original post by Rakas21)
The cap requires no funding since social care is private, the problem with it is that over time as inflation brings the average cost closer to the cap, it will provide a strong disincentive to opening new care homes. It's a bad long term policy.
Her new policy seems to be similar to Labour's policy, except that she hasn't costed it like Labour have.

If Labour backtracked on a major policy and then didn't cost their new policy, the right wing press would be absolutely slating them for it.

Will they do the same for the Tories?

Rarely before has a party's manifesto fallen apart within four days of releasing it. Strong and stable? As if.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#76
Report 2 years ago
#76
(Original post by Bornblue)
So Corbyn explicitly condemns the IRA in an interview and the Telegraph leads with a headline about how he refuses to condemn the IRA.

Funny that they didn't do a headline about the Tories links with the Saudi regime, but I guess that's okay because it's the Tories.

Also funny that they didn't lead on Damien Green refusing to clarify how much the social care plan would cost elderly people.

Also the Telegraph today tried to link Corbyn to a group which contained Holocaust deniers.

Why the smear attack? Why do they not attack the Tories in the same way?

And again, I've asked several times for you to list just one policy in the Labour manifesto which is extremist. Your answer so far seems to be that we won't use the Nuclear Deterrent first even though that's the purpose of a deterrent.
Which interview was that, certainly not the Sophie Ridge interview in which he answered "no..." sure he went on to condemn all bombing, but why was it not "yes, but.." and then go on to clarify that this extends to unionists and other terrorism.

He said "No, I think what you have to say is all bombing has to be condemned"

But because condemning unequivocally the IRA and condemning all bombing are not mutually exclusive there is absolutely no reason that could not have been:

"Yes, but I think what you have to say is all bombing has to be condemned"

One three letter word (that you too have difficulty with) is all that was needed, and time after time he refused to utter it.

As for the nuclear deterrent, it isn't that you don't use it, it's that you don't have to, it is necessary to have a willingness to use it. A standing army too is a deterrent, also a deterrent you don't want to have to use, but one you have to be willing to use. Likewise with economic sanctions. In an ideal world none of those would be necessary, but this is not an ideal world.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#77
Report 2 years ago
#77
(Original post by Bornblue)
Her new policy seems to be similar to Labour's policy, except that she hasn't costed it like Labour have.

If Labour backtracked on a major policy and then didn't cost their new policy, the right wing press would be absolutely slating them for it.

Will they do the same for the Tories?

Never before has a party's manifesto fallen apart within four days of releasing it. Strong and stable? As if.
Labour have costed? Not very well, even a GCSE econ student should be able to poke holes in their costing, as would 5 minutes on Google

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#78
Report 2 years ago
#78
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Which interview was that, certainly not the Sophie Ridge interview in which he answered "no..." sure he went on to condemn all bombing, but why was it not "yes, but.." and then go on to clarify that this extends to unionists and other terrorism.

He said "No, I think what you have to say is all bombing has to be condemned"

But because condemning unequivocally the IRA and condemning all bombing are not mutually exclusive there is absolutely no reason that could not have been:

"Yes, but I think what you have to say is all bombing has to be condemned"

One three letter word (that you too have difficulty with) is all that was needed, and time after time he refused to utter it.
Semantics. He was asked if he condemned the IRA and he said he condemned them. Of course he condemned all bombings. His links were with Sinn Fein anyway, not the IRA.

As for the nuclear deterrent, it isn't that you don't use it, it's that you don't have to, it is necessary to have a willingness to use it. A standing army too is a deterrent, also a deterrent you don't want to have to use, but one you have to be willing to use. Likewise with economic sanctions. In an ideal world none of those would be necessary, but this is not an ideal world.

Posted from TSR Mobile
People cannot make the argument that Nuclear Weapons are a deterrent and then say we should use them first.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#79
Report 2 years ago
#79
(Original post by Jammy Duel)
Labour have costed? Not very well, even a GCSE econ student should be able to poke holes in their costing, as would 5 minutes on Google

Posted from TSR Mobile
As opposed to no costing at all from the Tories.
This is another policy they have taken from Labour. Pretty strange to brand a party as extremist and then nick quite a few of their policies.
0
reply
Jammy Duel
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#80
Report 2 years ago
#80
(Original post by Bornblue)
Semantics. He was asked if he condemned the IRA and he said he condemned them. Of course he condemned all bombings. His links were with Sinn Fein anyway, not the IRA.


People cannot make the argument that Nuclear Weapons are a deterrent and then say we should use them first.
FIVE TIMES he refused to say yes, it may be semantics but it does not change the fact that he refused to specifically condemn a subset, which was the question. Condemning a subset does not mean the whole cannot be condemned, as per the previous post. If he condemns all bombing why would he not explicitly condemn a specific group?

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
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