Of course no one ever bought something because they saw an ad. That would be sorcery. :confused:

Sorcery, I reckon.

I expect you will get an explanation. It's the general policy to give them when requested.

Censorship is sweeping like a disease - very sad to see it plaguing a philosophy forum wherein one might hope for refuge *from* censorship. — A Gnostic Agnostic

God no. This is a refuge from non-censorship, such as in public spaces like YouTube comment sections. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be a philosophy forum—the philosophy would be buried in masses of irrelevant and low-quality crap.

Not to be unhelpful, but as you've already sent a request for clarification to @jamalrob, and he's the one who deleted the discussion, I'll let him deal with it. (It is theoretically possible to send copies of deleted OPs to the OP writer. Whether that's done is up to the mod who deleted it.)

I locked it. No particular reflection on you. It was just deteriorating. And we don't have any special guidelines re autistic posters, but they've never been a particular problem anyway, so...

@jamalrob deleted at least one I found. So, you can PM him or he may respond here.

But the double standards are noted. — NOS4A2

Previously, you didn't know what the backstop, the main obstacle to securing a deal, was. Now you've shown you didn't know Boris Johnson supported Brexit despite the fact he was one of the biggest names in the Leave campaign and, according to many commentators, the main reason the vote got over the line. And you constantly give the impression you don't understand how close the vote was. If I ever come into a conversation about anything with this lack of background knowledge, it will either be because I'm helplessly drunk or otherwise have lost my senses completely. What's your excuse? Why are you here?

You'd be more convincing if you made at least a minimal effort to recognize the nuances of the situation. I'm not sure what purpose your posts serve otherwise. Anyway, carry on.

The vote was approximately 50/50 (51.9 vs 48.1), i.e. split down the middle. Not enough difference to unqualifiedly designate one side as 'the masses' or 'the people'. Is that not obvious to you?

The dichotomy here is not between the elites and the masses. The masses are split down the middle and so are the elites. And when an argument is as easy to parody as yours, that's a good indication it's a bad argument. (See again below).

The people voted otherwise. — NOS4A2

Sure, and when I give you 48% of my money, I keep it all to myself and you get nothing.

Didn’t Johnson vote to remain? — NOS4A2

Boris Johnson is the current PM. He campaigned and voted to leave and is now trying to leave.

Our self-anointed elites — NOS4A2

Salt-of-the-earth English Brexiteers:



vs. remainer elites:

Trump is right. — NOS4A2

Clearly.

This is not supposed to be a debate about religion. See the OP.

It is a thread to discuss the disruptive and disrespectful behavior of atheists and anti-religious posters on this thread. — T Clark

All off-topic posts are being deleted.

We're seeking submissions of original articles you can PM to us for consideration. Please do not submit anything published elsewhere.

Welcomes. :smile:

I probably need to expand my diet or something.

What does soap taste like?

@Banno @Wallows

Yes, well, I suppose we'll have to wait until we get cucked by Porat 2 and the third gen of philosophy forums takes over and doesn't live up to your expectations before you appreciate the golden age that is now.

@Paul

I had read that Gassendi discussion before and remember it being wild and wonderful. And there's plenty more good stuff archived although Porat erased most of my swansong. *Shrugs*

Nah, they’re shit. — Michael

Golden shit though? :cry:

If there are instances of trolling, the remedy is to flag the post and alert the mods to remove the post and warn the troller. — Hanover

:up:

For example, I almost never read the religious (or anti-religious) discussions, so that would be the way to get my attention.

Alas, I failed in my goal, although I've enjoyed the thread and learned something, i.e. never listen to the moderators. — T Clark

Slow learner. ;)

Aside: Much unwarranted generalization going on here. I'd imagine most here would decline a tour of duty in this war.

It's that movie where Tom Cruise has dreams within dreams and in the last dream he saves the galaxy but because of gravity his kids get really old and forget about him. Then he dies or something.

=Conservative Party :death:

$Brexit + Trump = \frac {Boris Johnson} {Dominic Cummings}$

This guy is good. Very lucid. (Has a bunch of series, including the below).

[Moved to Feedback]

At least they mostly manage to post in the right category.

Maybe the bridge will be a prelude to a new Celtic Union of National Territories, whose acronym shall be a fond remembrance of the British Prime Minister who inspired its inception.

Can we try not to harass posters who want to leave? Seeing as we don't know what their personal situation is an' all. Thank you.

Welcome to Ireland, Bonzo.

https://twitter.com/IamHappyToast/status/1171050051860422657?s=20

Whether or not Ireland accepted the treaty of Lisbon had no implications whatsoever for the border. We were still all in the EU one way or the other.

(You might begin to understand now why the EU and Ireland will never submit to Boris's tough guy act and why his "negotiations" are all just a vain show. It's not intransigence on their part, it's bringing Britain to heel on its irresponsible demands. And that will not change.

So, British leavers can huff and puff about a hard Brexit all they want, but they won't get a deal that drags Northern Ireland away from its integrated relationship with the South; and with no-deal off the table, their only other option will be to draw up a customs border between themselves and Northern Ireland. In other words, initiate a de facto break-up of the UK—which would just be the beginning as Scotland would almost certainly desert next with Northern Ireland very possibly then going the whole hog and joining the South).

Well, according to Stanley Johnson, Boris's dad, it doesn't matter because, and I quote, “if the Irish people want to shoot each other, they will shoot each other”.



The British and Irish governments agreed there would be no hard border on the island of Ireland. Free movement north and south. That was part of the compromise that ended the war up there. Dumping that commitment in pursuit of a hard Brexit is as unpincipled as China reneging on its agreements with Britain over Hong Kong.

I'm from Ireland. The kink here is a potential return to violence. If the UK crashes out with no-deal, there'll have to be a hard border on the island, and that means the Good Friday agreement is down the tubes. That's a deadly serious issue.

The point is that contingency plans do not make disasters of any sort organized. They merely try to mitigate the chaos to some degree. The government's own report makes this clear. Just read it—or at least about it.

:clap:

Read: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/operation-chaos-whitehalls-secret-no-deal-brexit-plan-leaked-j6ntwvhll
+
https://intpolicydigest.org/2019/08/19/no-deal-chaos-the-brexit-cliff-face-and-operation-yellowhammer/

You can prepare for a hurricane too. Does that make the hurricane organized?

Eerie.

Perfectly timed for the Sunday Newspapers. :up:

'bout time you showed up. :up: :cool: