OT. The futures Bright, the Futures Brexit!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

To quote one of my teachers, 'Ramanag you have cloth ears'. Swale demanded proof of the issue at hand many months ago, I provided it, he then accepted it (he had to its in the public domain) and has been sore about it ever since, hence his repeated reigniting of the issue. I say AGAIN, 'end of subject from me from here onwards' unless you want me to enlighten you on the source data by PM

---

Oh FFS! You are the one with cloth ears!! And an inability to see past the agenda that you were trying to push!
No I bloody didn't accept it! I acknowledged that by coincidence a report indicated that there were a greater percentage of ethnic minorities in the media than there were in the general population.

But this was irrelevant to the question I asked you, which was. Why does it concern you? What made you even think that was the case? and continue to ask you without to date a response - which is what rA means when he says you disappear, or back off, you only address the issue that supports your agenda.

I'm not in any way sore that your apparently racist observation is backed up by the apparent fact there are 4% more ethnic minorities working in the media than are in the general population as a whole. Why would I be, I don't give a ****.

You keep flattering yourself that you have in some way "scored" a point over me, or that you have "got under my skin" ah well little things please little minds I guess, so believe that if you wish I'm really not bothered.

But you still haven't answered why you whinged about this issue in a number of posts? Of course I more than likely know why you haven't done this, because your rather unsavoury views bubble beneath your many posts.

So again, the data is IRRELEVANT, what I was getting at and I've repeated this many times is WHY are you so bothered?

Now if you answered that, we might get somewhere, but you won't because the answer wouldn't be flattering would it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

‘Teachers pet’...lol! You’re being ridiculous...again! We all have people we agree with and disagree with. As it happens I agree with most of what Swale (and MA) write...politically, and disagree with most of what you (and GP) write...again politically. That’s all there is to it.

I repeat...if you say you’re going to do something...do it...don’t come all ‘sound and fury’ and then run away. It was you, and only you, who made a fuss about there being too many non white media presenters, who objected to Swale’s Hitler references and who said you were going to ‘out’ Swale as having admitted he was wrong.

---

He is still obsessed with the fact that there is an apparent over representation of non white presenters, he is so thrilled to have had a suspicion confirmed, he is blind to the fact that his obsession with it makes him look more than a little unsavoury in his views!!

Talk about digging a hole, but hey he can't see it and I'm bored with the little man now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

So you say 'don't get into a silly spat' and then you fuel it with ill-informed anecdotes which aren't actually anything to do with the initial comment.

There is actually no spat going on, merely Swale a) having a massive issue with a comment I made quite some time ago and b) not now recalling/accepting that he was proved wrong at the time. To be clear, since I provided independant data supporting my point, I've made no further comment but Swale has repeatedly brought the issue back up (maybe a dozen times), including quoting numbers which are significantly wrong and skewed to his POV, and my personal conclusion from that is that he has some deep issue of his own in this area. If you research back far enough, which you seem to be a fan of, you'll see (as I mentioned) maybe a dozen 'flare ups' from Swale on this, and (my estimate) more text offered by him than offered by me by a factor of maybe 100.

You'll notice I've said 'give it a rest', and although this is an open forum and I'm in essence being 'cancelled' (another wokeism, sorry) from any future discussion on this, I'm happy to do so. End of subject from me from here onwards. I somehow doubt we'll see that across the piece though

---

**** me you really are thick or do you just avoid the actual point being made?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

**** me you really are thick or do you just avoid the actual point being made?

---

By all means put me on ignore Swale, in that same 'special' way you have done TTR which means you can still read all his posts...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

To quote one of my teachers, 'Ramanag you have cloth ears'. Swale demanded proof of the issue at hand many months ago, I provided it, he then accepted it (he had to its in the public domain) and has been sore about it ever since, hence his repeated reigniting of the issue. I say AGAIN, 'end of subject from me from here onwards' unless you want me to enlighten you on the source data by PM

---

I suspect none of your teachers ever said ‘Ramanag you have cloth ears’ ;D...that’s just something you’ve made up isn’t it?
Either way, my ‘cloth ears’, as you call them, are nothing compared to your selective memory.

You make things up when cornered, AF...I’m sorry but there’s no other way of putting it. The ‘spat’ with Swale, which you claim doesn’t exist (8225), is all too real and tedious as regular readers all know. He may wind you up at times but you don’t half go looking for it sometimes. Maybe it’s a strategy to bump up posts...I wouldn’t know.

You said recently you’d got proof that he was wrong and then failed to provide it even when he asked you to. You did the same with me a couple of weeks ago when you said I’d failed to respond three times to your challenges.
I asked what they were and you came up with one particularly lame example but nothing more.

It’s really not very important but I’m afraid it’s what you do. It’s alright to be wrong you know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

I suspect none of your teachers ever said ‘Ramanag you have cloth ears’ ;D...that’s just something you’ve made up isn’t it?
Either way, my ‘cloth ears’, as you call them, are nothing compared to your selective memory.

You make things up when cornered, AF...I’m sorry but there’s no other way of putting it. The ‘spat’ with Swale, which you claim doesn’t exist (8225), is all too real and tedious as regular readers all know. He may wind you up at times but you don’t half go looking for it sometimes. Maybe it’s a strategy to bump up posts...I wouldn’t know.

You said recently you’d got proof that he was wrong and then failed to provide it even when he asked you to. You did the same with me a couple of weeks ago when you said I’d failed to respond three times to your challenges.
I asked what they were and you came up with one particularly lame example but nothing more.

It’s really not very important but I’m afraid it’s what you do. It’s alright to be wrong you know.

---

The cloth ears thing? Is that not a phrase you've heard? Sorry, thought it was standard Derbyshire, its certainly standard Ilson/'eanor

Not sure I've ever made anything up on here rA, I'm a sod for it on fb but have a bit more respect for the few on here

My comment about the 'spat' not existing only refers to the 'representation' issue. Last mentioned by me 5/8/21 (Twenty One), since then brought into conversation regularly by Swale (I counted 12 times and didn't look too hard), my only retort repeatedly being that I appear to have got under his skin. the frequency and length of his responses suggests thats the case

I'll send you the proof by PM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

The cloth ears thing? Is that not a phrase you've heard? Sorry, thought it was standard Derbyshire, its certainly standard Ilson/'eanor

Not sure I've ever made anything up on here rA, I'm a sod for it on fb but have a bit more respect for the few on here

My comment about the 'spat' not existing only refers to the 'representation' issue. Last mentioned by me 5/8/21 (Twenty One), since then brought into conversation regularly by Swale (I counted 12 times and didn't look too hard), my only retort repeatedly being that I appear to have got under his skin. the frequency and length of his responses suggests thats the case

I'll send you the proof by PM

---

Really? Please don’t, I’m actually not that interested. Between you and Swale.

Yes I’ve heard of the ‘cloth ears thing’ and I don’t think it’s confined to Derbyshire. I’ve also heard of quotation marks and you wrote...To quote one of my teachers, ‘Ramanag you have cloth ears’. That isn’t a quote is it? It’s okay to be wrong. ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

That isn’t a quote is it? It’s okay to be wrong. ;D

---

You got me there, I should have said 'to paraphrase'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ramAnag

Really? Please don’t

---

OK, but none so blind as those who will not see

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

You got me there, I should have said 'to paraphrase'



OK, but none so blind as those who will not see

---

Both deaf and blind then apparently. :zzz:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

The cloth ears thing? Is that not a phrase you've heard? Sorry, thought it was standard Derbyshire, its certainly standard Ilson/'eanor

Not sure I've ever made anything up on here rA, I'm a sod for it on fb but have a bit more respect for the few on here

My comment about the 'spat' not existing only refers to the 'representation' issue. Last mentioned by me 5/8/21 (Twenty One), since then brought into conversation regularly by Swale (I counted 12 times and didn't look too hard), my only retort repeatedly being that I appear to have got under his skin. the frequency and length of his responses suggests thats the case

I'll send you the proof by PM

---

You don't have proof of anything! How dumb do you have to be to realise that? I mean yes you found some data that backed up your crude assessment that there is an over representation of people from an ethnic background in the media.

But as I said at the time, why is it so important to you? (Still waiting for an answer on that by the way) and it isn't even a significant amount, I mean if you could show that it was say 40% against 24% in the general population I'd say you had a point, but I'd still say as i did at the time (whereby you accused me of trying to weasel my way out of being "wrong") its not significant and doesn't prove whatever point you were trying to make.

I keep bringing it up, because you have never ever given an answer as to why you whinged on about this so called over representation all the time - you seem not to understand that - I actually think you do, but don't want to betray the rather unsavoury views that led to you doing that.

Why you think I am the least bit bothered that you have managed to find some data which backs up your racist views I really don't know.

But clearly its very important to you for some reason, a wiser chap might have actually just let it slide by, realising that his obsession with this doesn't cast him in a very good light.

Quite how this has any relevance to your patronising and absolutely untrue comment that my Hitler analogy is wrong which is how you connected all this up is equally puzzling. I do wonder what goes on in that mind of yours, a wee bit confused I guess, poor lambkin.

Anyway keep feeling pleased with yourself its no skin off my nose.

You can't argue with a sick mind it seems!