keep politics out of the game

[BOZO]

Welcome back. Quick question, do you think promoting and encouraging a gambling lifestyle is a good thing?

I have come back because I love every one on here and I miss every one on here

I miss Manly playing and every one on here is part of the passionate spirit of our club

We may no all agree and see things the same but we all bleed the same Manly blood and we all want our Manly team to thrive prosper and win premierships

Very good question feathered friend that you ask

Is promoting and encouraging a gambling and drinking lifestyle is a good thing?

Having worked in clubs for many years and have seen the catastrophic affects that people and their families have from the addictive gambling and drinking

On one hand we have signage display the catastrophic causes for gamming and alcohol

And then we have the hypocritical and enticing gamble responsible marketing in sport
And those marketing hypocrites are responsible for people being addicted and destroy their lives and their families as well
That is my view feathered friend

 

[Technical Coach]

This thread has descended into bitter invective, malicious attacks and cheap shots from all sides. Considering the thread title and some of the more recent antagonists (particularly in the case of @Technical Coach ), I shouldn't really be surprised.
View attachment 22721
I will wear my newly bestowed snowflake label as a badge of honour. Might even change my name to SnowFlakes4Life.

One of your problems Technical B**** is that you really like to give it on here, but you can't really take it in return.

Yes, I get the irony about starting this post complaining about "bitter invective, malicious attacks and cheap shots", and then finishing it with "bitter invective, malicious attacks and cheap shots"

I didn't instigate one bit of "bitter invective, malicious attacks and cheap shots" UNTIL you decided that high five giggles and back slapping posts with other users came into play.

I'm always very careful and pride myself on addressing the post and not the person,(have no issue if people don't agree with my posts and respond to explain why) i made a very special allowance for you due to the above reasons.(You have never been on my radar at all along with Budgie so why would i instigate at an unknown target)

All good keep at it if it makes you happy.

 

[Technical Coach]

Who on earth is Doug Heffernan?
I don’t know him either.
Are you ok?
You’ve come out swinging at me when you weren’t even part of the conversation.
Maybe you should block me if I’m that offensive to you.

1)Doug is a character from a TV show not tailored or targeted at your demographic obviously.
2)You do now somewhat
3)More than fine. RUOK if not here is a pamphlet to help you out.
4)You enjoy character opinion form posting and not addressing the content directly with high fives and back slapping responses so i offered a few "jabs" your way but i wouldn't waste time swinging at you.
5)Blocking is a pathetic form of self regulating.

 

[Eagles4Life]

I didn't instigate one bit of "bitter invective, malicious attacks and cheap shots" UNTIL you decided that high five giggles and back slapping posts with other users came into play.

I'm always very careful and pride myself on addressing the post and not the person,(have no issue if people don't agree with my posts and respond to explain why) i made a very special allowance for you due to the above reasons.(You have never been on my radar at all along with Budgie so why would i instigate at an unknown target)

All good keep at it if it makes you happy.

Mate I had already forgotten about you @Technical Coach Your posts are so heavily influenced by Jordan Peterson-isms (or similar), that I actually find it really difficult to take you seriously, on that basis alone. I don't have a lot of time for Peterson, and I definitely don't have anytime at all for his fanboys. However, I will call you on any bigoted, misogynistic, alt-right bull****, that may pop up in your post responses. Perhaps you should stick to your technical coaching posts, and try not to pollute them with alt-right ideology. Hope this helps.

 

[Budgie]

Mate I had already forgotten about you @Technical Coach Your posts are so heavily influenced by Jordan Peterson-isms (or similar), that I actually find it really difficult to take you seriously, on that basis alone. I don't have a lot of time for Peterson, and I definitely don't have anytime at all for his fanboys. However, I will call you on any bigoted, misogynistic, alt-right bull****, that may pop up in your post responses. Perhaps you should stick to your technical coaching posts, and try not to pollute them with alt-right ideology. Hope this helps.

I was well aware of the ghastly alt right ideology but not of Peterson until you mentioned him so I went for a little google dive, and wow, you're dead right.

 

[Captain Moondog]

I was well aware of the ghastly alt right ideology but not of Peterson until you mentioned him so I went for a little google dive, and wow, you're dead right.

A new age snake oil salesman.....wonder if he ever saw this movie

 

[Budgie]

A new age snake oil salesman.....wonder if he ever saw this movie

Ha! Love that film

 

[Captain Moondog]

Ha! Love that film

Me too. Having worked on trawlers I find it hard to accept Petersons theory that crustaceans and humans have similar brains.

 

[Technical Coach]

Mate I had already forgotten about you @Technical Coach Your posts are so heavily influenced by Jordan Peterson-isms (or similar), that I actually find it really difficult to take you seriously, on that basis alone. I don't have a lot of time for Peterson, and I definitely don't have anytime at all for his fanboys. However, I will call you on any bigoted, misogynistic, alt-right bull****, that may pop up in your post responses. Perhaps you should stick to your technical coaching posts, and try not to pollute them with alt-right ideology. Hope this helps.

Never voted right wing in my life and less likely these days to vote left wing. Right wing ruin economies through a lack of foresight and under spending causing the left wing to over compensate with the foresight and funding.

Right wing will crap on about "under our leadership there will be lower interest rates" when most of that is influenced by world cycles and timing of when you come into Govt. Labor for example is guaranteed to "retain" the higher interest rates viewpoint due to the present period for a long time now.(it's impact on the averages will be significant)

Left wing are too soft in terms of trying to appease and relate to everyone and taking on too much change in one hit.

I am no fan boy of Peterson but i do agree with some of his view points, as i've stated before i find him weak that he succumbed to drugs.

Do you agree how Essendon treated Andrew Thorburn because if that is considered acceptable this country is going to have a lot of conflict and be more divisive than bring people together.

 

[Eagles4Life]

Never voted right wing in my life and less likely these days to vote left wing. Right wing ruin economies through a lack of foresight and under spending causing the left wing to over compensate with the foresight and funding.

Right wing will crap on about "under our leadership there will be lower interest rates" when most of that is influenced by world cycles and timing of when you come into Govt. Labor for example is guaranteed to "retain" the higher interest rates viewpoint due to the present period for a long time now.(it's impact on the averages will be significant)

Left wing are too soft in terms of trying to appease and relate to everyone and taking on too much change in one hit.

I am no fan boy of Peterson but i do agree with some of his view points, as i've stated before i find him weak that he succumbed to drugs.

Do you agree how Essendon treated Andrew Thorburn because if that is considered acceptable this country is going to have a lot of conflict and be more divisive than bring people together.

Peterson is probably more alt-lite than alt-right, but his denunciations of identity politics and political correctness has attracted a massive fan base among the alt-right through their consumption of his writing and lectures.

The points you make about "Right Wing" incompetence and "Left Wing" appeasement are also pretty standard tropes made by Alt-Right commentators i.e. regard mainstream or traditional conservatives as weak and impotent, and the left as radical woke liberals i.e snowflakes Please note @Technical Coach that you have raised both these points in your rebuttal to my post above, and you have also used the term snowflake more than once when describing other posters on Silvertails (including me).....

Peterson is regarded with some degree of distaste and disgust by some Alt-right commentators for the same reason you use here, and you also discuss Peterson's weakness in a previous post, where you expanded further on that theme.

(Womens Team) Discussion

In all the time I've been here very few posts get taken down or edited. (In the last few days I've seen a few that I definitely wish were taken down!)

silvertails.net

The Alt-right is actually a pretty broad church, when you look at the ever-evolving strands that comprise it. Some of these strands have proved very attractive to ex-left radicals because it espouses rebellion or anti-establishment thinking. Another point you raise in your post above, where you say "you are less likely these days to vote left wing."

As for Andrew Thorburn. I see him as a pretty typical conservative traditionalist, committed to hierarchic and paternalistic values. This is demonstrated through the narrow teachings of his church, which haven't really changed much through its evolution from High Anglican to Evangelical Anglican. I don't have an opinion on his resignation, but also feel that there was no way he could have maintained both roles, as they were diametrically opposed in terms of governance, mission and philosophy.

 

[Technical Coach]

Peterson is probably more alt-lite than alt-right, but his denunciations of identity politics and political correctness has attracted a massive fan base among the alt-right through their consumption of his writing and lectures.

The points you make about "Right Wing" incompetence and "Left Wing" appeasement are also pretty standard tropes made by Alt-Right commentators i.e. regard mainstream or traditional conservatives as weak and impotent, and the left as radical woke liberals i.e snowflakes Please note @Technical Coach that you have raised both these points in your rebuttal to my post above, and you have also used the term snowflake more than once when describing other posters on Silvertails (including me).....

Peterson is regarded with some degree of distaste and disgust by some Alt-right commentators for the same reason you use here, and you also discuss Peterson's weakness in a previous post, where you expanded further on that theme.

(Womens Team) Discussion

In all the time I've been here very few posts get taken down or edited. (In the last few days I've seen a few that I definitely wish were taken down!)

silvertails.net

The Alt-right is actually a pretty broad church, when you look at the ever-evolving strands that comprise it. Some of these strands have proved very attractive to ex-left radicals because it espouses rebellion or anti-establishment thinking. Another point you raise in your post above, where you say "you are less likely these days to vote left wing."

As for Andrew Thorburn. I see him as a pretty typical conservative traditionalist, committed to hierarchic and paternalistic values. This is demonstrated through the narrow teachings of his church, which haven't really changed much through its evolution from High Anglican to Evangelical Anglican. I don't have an opinion on his resignation, but also feel that there was no way he could have maintained both roles, as they were diametrically opposed in terms of governance, mission and philosophy.

He worked for how long at NAB with no issues relative to others in the role.

Who else have i directly called a "snowflake" beyond yourself please post a link and if so did i instigate that kind of banter or was it a response/retaliation to a chatter instigating.

I've read many other posters over use the term in a direct targeted manner though.

Will be interesting to see what links you find that totally back up your statements and it's context.

Now don't get lazy and say you couldn't be bothered locating the direct comments i made and brush it off with a reply like "everyone knows your style of banter and "trolling"--- to cover your tracks.

Diametrically opposed what a load of broad scope intellectual hog wash that can be applied to every workplace or business relative to religion, was rarely if ever an issue in the past yet now in this toxic environment it now is.

I have no issue with some elements of Woke culture but it has gone way too far to the point of not being open minded and balanced in the way it is applied or thought through.

 

[Eagles4Life]

So this response demonstrates your capacity to ignore the core elements of a post, because they do not suit your inner narrative of yourself. So you take a word (snowflake) and build your rebuttal around how often you actually use the term, as if that was key to the original post.
Here is one example for you @Technical Coach
Post in thread 'Ice Man' Ice Man
Perhaps you should look further into other threads (specifically on SSM, Women in Sports, Polynesian neck tattoos etc) to see that whilst the term itself is not used explicitly, the sentiment in relation to other posters calling you out is implicitly understood.Your attack on @Lyonstomenzies is pretty direct, and defeats the key argument in your response by itself though.

I would agree with you that everybody knows your style of dribble. Often your words are well chosen to elicit specific responses around controversial societal issues. However, this is also an extremely common technique utilised in online argument by persons who espouse a similar flawed worldview to yourself. These individuals are often found in the "Manosphere", and no doubt some of your concepts are "borrowed" from online discussion in these forums.

I would actually say that your utilisation of this technique is fundamental to disguising the recurring underlying themes in your posts which are clearly bigoted, misogynistic, antifeminist, homophobic and racist. There are so many examples of the above that it's unnecessary to post examples. A good read of your posts on SSM from 2017 would be quite illuminating for any posters on here that have any interest in further studying your rather unique dribble-speak.

 

[Technical Coach]

The thread you linked is dominated with posts making fun of Reubens looks based around an 80s film star and 90s pop rapper, there was plenty of jokes in that direction before I added my sense of humour relating what pop stars in the past have done to drop the pop safe image and to be taken seriously. I was just impersonating a character of an over controlling pop manager for comedic effect nothing more.

Right after that one poster “instigates” an attack on me taking offence to a post that had nothing to do with him personally and made it personal, I replied in kind which is fair game. Now if i called him a snowflake without him ever attacking me personally then your points are valid, see the difference.

On top of that there is no way in hell your post is referencing that one instance from 3yrs ago about the use of snowflake, how many more recent(not inclusive of the one directed to you)or older posts did I use that phrase to warrant making a point about it.

People can call me out with constructive debate all good but high five giggles and instigating personal attacks will be replied to in the same manner.

On top of that the poster eventually was all good with my so called dribble as he didn’t mind my different style and point of view.

In general Manly have enough issues to deal with to run a successful club on and off the field and preaching is not helping the cause. Worrying about women in league before even running a stable successful club financially is pretty much pointless also, the women’s game relies on the success of the men’s not the other way around, until Manly is flooded with funds and stable I’m totally against this funding.

 

[BOZO]

To Mr Penn and His political Marketing Men

Politics is all about the Dicks

It has nothing to do with the spirit of the sport

 

[BOZO]

Politics Kills the spirit of the sport

 

[Technical Coach]

So this response demonstrates your capacity to ignore the core elements of a post, because they do not suit your inner narrative of yourself. So you take a word (snowflake) and build your rebuttal around how often you actually use the term, as if that was key to the original post.
Here is one example for you @Technical Coach
Post in thread 'Ice Man' Ice Man
Perhaps you should look further into other threads (specifically on SSM, Women in Sports, Polynesian neck tattoos etc) to see that whilst the term itself is not used explicitly, the sentiment in relation to other posters calling you out is implicitly understood.Your attack on @Lyonstomenzies is pretty direct, and defeats the key argument in your response by itself though.

I would agree with you that everybody knows your style of dribble. Often your words are well chosen to elicit specific responses around controversial societal issues. However, this is also an extremely common technique utilised in online argument by persons who espouse a similar flawed worldview to yourself. These individuals are often found in the "Manosphere", and no doubt some of your concepts are "borrowed" from online discussion in these forums.

I would actually say that your utilisation of this technique is fundamental to disguising the recurring underlying themes in your posts which are clearly bigoted, misogynistic, antifeminist, homophobic and racist. There are so many examples of the above that it's unnecessary to post examples. A good read of your posts on SSM from 2017 would be quite illuminating for any posters on here that have any interest in further studying your rather unique dribble-speak.

I have stated I support and watch certain female sports and a fan of women athletes so how does that make me “clearly anti feminist”.

Where have I made a racist remark good luck finding a clear version of that, I’ve never once singled out a race other than to highlight different aerobic abilities and injury recovery speeds(that one poster made that out to be a racist comment)

 

[47MVEagle]

Go along with the outdated beliefs reference and total respect to you for trying to get some good reaoning into the matter but are you also differentiating between discriminating or not accepting someone else "s sexuality . Not accepting is not necessarily the same as discriminating . Anyway maybe you were differentiating .

What I’m trying to do is get to the root of the issue so real conversation can occur & hopefully compromise can be reached, much like many other issues previously prohibited by the church e.g. divorce, female priests, etc.

As we are probably all aware, there are many outdated views that are no longer applicable (nor accepted) in modern society that various holy texts promoted - owning slaves, raping & beating your wife if she misbehaves, etc.

The Quran & it’s associated haddiths forbids homosexuality (among other things) & the most fundamental of its followers (notably in Saudi Arabia) are happy to hold public executions each week of Muslims who break this “rule”.

How many steps removed from that attitude are we when someone’s “mumble mumble religious beliefs mumble n that” allows them to discriminate against homosexuals without actually coming out & saying so?

Your use of “discriminating” & “not accepting” are interchangeable IMO. If there is even the subtlest of difference between these 2 terms, surely the people standing behind their religious beliefs should be able to articulate exactly why they either discriminate or do not accept homosexuals?

This is the biggest problem IMO - these people are hiding behind “religious beliefs” in discriminating/not accepting homosexuals yet will not explain their reasoning why.

Are they blindly following something their church & the bible has told them or do they genuinely disagree with the existence of homosexuals?

This method of discriminating against/not accepting homosexuals is not tolerated anywhere else in society - there are laws prohibiting it e.g. when interviewing a candidate for a job or promotion, selection on a sporting team, etc.

Let’s get the conversation started so the real reasons can be articulated (usually fear-based) & education can take place so better understanding & ultimately acceptance, can occur.

 

[Technical Coach]

What I’m trying to do is get to the root of the issue so real conversation can occur & hopefully compromise can be reached, much like many other issues previously prohibited by the church e.g. divorce, female priests, etc.

As we are probably all aware, there are many outdated views that are no longer applicable (nor accepted) in modern society that various holy texts promoted - owning slaves, raping & beating your wife if she misbehaves, etc.

The Quran & it’s associated haddiths forbids homosexuality (among other things) & the most fundamental of its followers (notably in Saudi Arabia) are happy to hold public executions each week of Muslims who break this “rule”.

How many steps removed from that attitude are we when someone’s “mumble mumble religious beliefs mumble n that” allows them to discriminate against homosexuals without actually coming out & saying so?

Your use of “discriminating” & “not accepting” are interchangeable IMO. If there is even the subtlest of difference between these 2 terms, surely the people standing behind their religious beliefs should be able to articulate exactly why they either discriminate or do not accept homosexuals?

This is the biggest problem IMO - these people are hiding behind “religious beliefs” in discriminating/not accepting homosexuals yet will not explain their reasoning why.

Are they blindly following something their church & the bible has told them or do they genuinely disagree with the existence of homosexuals?

This method of discriminating against/not accepting homosexuals is not tolerated anywhere else in society - there are laws prohibiting it e.g. when interviewing a candidate for a job or promotion, selection on a sporting team, etc.

Let’s get the conversation started so the real reasons can be articulated (usually fear-based) & education can take place so better understanding & ultimately acceptance, can occur.

Did the club break the law in it's promotion of an ideal---No

Have the players did anything illegal---No

Do the players have the right not to participate in a promotion due to Religious Beliefs---probably with a high degree of certainty yes, also based on the clubs actions and acceptance of the players not doing so.

Would the club promote a religious group in the same manner considering that too would be an ideals based promotion----probably not and i would agree with this stance also.

Would players boycott a game promoting a religious group on the jersey---high degree of certainty yes and i would agree with this stance also.

So the players basically did nothing wrong and were probably well within their legal rights to boycott the game, the club did nothing wrong legally in promoting an ideal, the club didn't "force" the players to promote the ideal or threaten to sack based on their views or actions so where is the problem other than the stupidity of a club going down the path of preaching and pushing ideals.

You can't make people have the same views, it's not illegal to have different views, where is the "acceptance" of different views in this case---it's all think like us, promote like us, you are wrong and outdated if you don't think like us.

Not once have the players threatened anyone with opposing views to them or did anything illegal towards the LGBTQ+ community, so where is the problem here.

If the club is not happy with the players stance, pay them out(probably legal ramifications if they did so) or don't resign said players when their contract is up----good luck with that mentality and effectively pushing away a huge number of players wishing to sign with the club if Manly continues to go down this non neutral path of promotion.

The club can still promote "inclusivity" or "LGBTQ+" in a manner that shows the clubs stance without bringing the players into the equation. For example a company can promote RUOK day or Cancer awareness yet the employees don't have to promote it or wear uniforms promoting the day while still going about their work duties that they are paid to do.

Turning up to the workplace has nothing to do with your ideals or views or sexuality, you are paid to perform a role and that is it. The players are paid to perform as a Rugby League player and promote the brand for awareness reasons in the market place not it's ideals.

 

[Technical Coach]

What I’m trying to do is get to the root of the issue so real conversation can occur & hopefully compromise can be reached, much like many other issues previously prohibited by the church e.g. divorce, female priests, etc.

As we are probably all aware, there are many outdated views that are no longer applicable (nor accepted) in modern society that various holy texts promoted - owning slaves, raping & beating your wife if she misbehaves, etc.

The Quran & it’s associated haddiths forbids homosexuality (among other things) & the most fundamental of its followers (notably in Saudi Arabia) are happy to hold public executions each week of Muslims who break this “rule”.

How many steps removed from that attitude are we when someone’s “mumble mumble religious beliefs mumble n that” allows them to discriminate against homosexuals without actually coming out & saying so?

Your use of “discriminating” & “not accepting” are interchangeable IMO. If there is even the subtlest of difference between these 2 terms, surely the people standing behind their religious beliefs should be able to articulate exactly why they either discriminate or do not accept homosexuals?

This is the biggest problem IMO - these people are hiding behind “religious beliefs” in discriminating/not accepting homosexuals yet will not explain their reasoning why.

Are they blindly following something their church & the bible has told them or do they genuinely disagree with the existence of homosexuals?

This method of discriminating against/not accepting homosexuals is not tolerated anywhere else in society - there are laws prohibiting it e.g. when interviewing a candidate for a job or promotion, selection on a sporting team, etc.

Let’s get the conversation started so the real reasons can be articulated (usually fear-based) & education can take place so better understanding & ultimately acceptance, can occur.

How many steps removed are we away from discriminating against religion without actually coming out and saying so? (works both ways and it appears to be happening in the Essendon case)

That is why you keep the promotion of ideals out of the workplace and treat everyone equally along with base employment on performance factors not viewpoints or ideals.

 

[Technical Coach]

I have come back because I love every one on here and I miss every one on here

I miss Manly playing and every one on here is part of the passionate spirit of our club

We may no all agree and see things the same but we all bleed the same Manly blood and we all want our Manly team to thrive prosper and win premierships

Very good question feathered friend that you ask

Is promoting and encouraging a gambling and drinking lifestyle is a good thing?

Having worked in clubs for many years and have seen the catastrophic affects that people and their families have from the addictive gambling and drinking

On one hand we have signage display the catastrophic causes for gamming and alcohol

And then we have the hypocritical and enticing gamble responsible marketing in sport
And those marketing hypocrites are responsible for people being addicted and destroy their lives and their families as well
That is my view feathered friend

The Marketers are not responsible for peoples actions, people have to take personal responsibility over their actions.

The Marketers job is to promote brand awareness and stmulate thought in ones mind increasing the likelihood of consumption or use or purchase of said product.