What grinds my gears...

[HighPeakFox]

1 minute ago, Tommy Fresh said:

The "malignant and tumerous" remark comes across extremely sarcastic. Also aware of the term being used in other instances but for such trivial issues it seems very unnecessary and I'll happily take offence (I won't call out as to why especially not publically, firstly it's not the place and because you seemingly aren't bothered about causing offence and it wouldn't reflect well on yourself)

I don't actually want you to say those things now, but more a point to say that's probably a more reasoned reaponse.

Look - I am not setting out to cause offence, and I will repeat, I accept that some dislike my use of the word. I just dislike the politics of offence. If people are offended, that is theirs to deal with. Plenty gets said in life and on this forum that I could claim I found offensive but I refuse to do so because it is a non-argument. To say I am seemingly not bothered about causing offence is unfair.

 

I won't use that word again in the same context, so hopefully that at least tells you I'm listening whilst not wholly agreeing.

[Tommy Fresh]

1 minute ago, HighPeakFox said:

Look - I am not setting out to cause offence, and I will repeat, I accept that some dislike my use of the word. I just dislike the politics of offence. If people are offended, that is theirs to deal with. Plenty gets said in life and on this forum that I could claim I found offensive but I refuse to do so because it is a non-argument. To say I am seemingly not bothered about causing offence is unfair.

 

I won't use that word again in the same context, so hopefully that at least tells you I'm listening whilst not wholly agreeing.

My initial post wasn't solely aimed at yourself by the way, there has been numerous times it's been used on topics not worthy of having the term applied to them. Happy to deal with my offence, but I'm also happy to point out why, I wouldn't say taking offence to matters is a non-argument, especially on a subject such as this.

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, Tommy Fresh said:

My initial post wasn't solely aimed at yourself by the way, there has been numerous times it's been used on topics not worthy of having the term applied to them. Happy to deal with my offence, but I'm also happy to point out why, I wouldn't say taking offence to matters is a non-argument, especially on a subject such as this.

As said elsewhere, it is a matter of context, and although I know you deem it to be too trivial for use here, we will just have to agree to disagree.

[Jon the Hat]

It is a pretty well known use of the word, although probably less so than it used to be.  As nothers noted, usually reserved for serious problems, though I can see that some might believe the club has serious problems.

 

cancer

noun

1.  

   a disease caused by an uncontrolled division of abnormal cells in a part of the body.

   "he's got cancer"
    
2. an evil or destructive practice or phenomenon that is hard to contain or eradicate.

   "gambling is a cancer sweeping across the nation"

[FoxesDeb]

There's nothing wrong with using the word correctly is there? It has two meanings as others have already said, and it's one of the signs of the zodiac. People seem to think the disease is being referred to when it's actually being used correctly. 

 

The definition in the Cambridge dictionary is 'a harmful activity which spreads quickly' 

 

 

 

[Zear0]

56 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

There's nothing wrong with using the word correctly is there? It has two meanings as others have already said, and it's one of the signs of the zodiac. People seem to think the disease is being referred to when it's actually being used correctly. 

 

The definition in the Cambridge dictionary is 'a harmful activity which spreads quickly' 

 

 

 

Now now Deb, let's not bring reason, facts or logic to this discussion.  As we know, nobody is ever wrong nowadays and feelings and opinion are outweight facts.

Edited 9 June 2023 by Zear0
Rather key "not" missing!

[grobyfox1990]

Haha this was an entertaining thread to read whilst taking a post 3-course lunch dump, even better as I cannot see usernames so can assume all sorts of personas from those commenting. You can see how pride getting in the way of saying 'sorry' and 'it's ok' even when you're not sorry and it's not ok is a major hindrance to the world.

[HighPeakFox]

1 hour ago, grobyfox1990 said:

Haha this was an entertaining thread to read whilst taking a post 3-course lunch dump, even better as I cannot see usernames so can assume all sorts of personas from those commenting. You can see how pride getting in the way of saying 'sorry' and 'it's ok' even when you're not sorry and it's not ok is a major hindrance to the world.

I hope, then, you don't mind apologising to me for misrepresenting why I didn't say sorry - it has nothing to do with pride, it is entirely to do with having nothing to be sorry for.

 

I've pledged to not use that word in that context again - that is a concession.

[Finnegan]

 

[SouthStandUpperTier]

Those Melissa McCarthy Booking.com adverts soon got annoying.

[bovril]

1 minute ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Those Melissa McCarthy Booking.com adverts soon got annoying.

 

[FoxesDeb]

14 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I hope, then, you don't mind apologising to me for misrepresenting why I didn't say sorry - it has nothing to do with pride, it is entirely to do with having nothing to be sorry for.

 

I've pledged to not use that word in that context again - that is a concession.

Obviously it's your prerogative, but you shouldn't feel you can't use a completey acceptable word because some people don't understand it's meaning. 

[HighPeakFox]

11 minutes ago, FoxesDeb said:

Obviously it's your prerogative, but you shouldn't feel you can't use a completey acceptable word because some people don't understand it's meaning. 

Thank you. However, doing so led to a complaint and an X hour ban within 5 minutes of saying it, so using it again isn't going to change them, is it?

[HighPeakFox]

19 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

Actually, not helpful - it needs processing before it can be let go. That is how the mind works.

[grobyfox1990]

24 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I hope, then, you don't mind apologising to me for misrepresenting why I didn't say sorry - it has nothing to do with pride, it is entirely to do with having nothing to be sorry for.

 

I've pledged to not use that word in that context again - that is a concession.

Absolutely, I do apologise and am sorry if i mis-represented you, that is not what I intended. As I said I cannot see usernames but judging by the reply I assume were the cancer caller. I'll state it again, why don't you just say sorry for offending someone even if you do not mean it, saved a whole lot of posturing back n forth.

You do not decide whether you have 'nothing to be sorry for' when someone explicitly told you something you have done has offended them.

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, grobyfox1990 said:

Absolutely, I do apologise and am sorry if i mis-represented you, that is not what I intended. As I said I cannot see usernames but judging by the reply I assume were the cancer caller. I'll state it again, why don't you just say sorry for offending someone even if you do not mean it, saved a whole lot of posturing back n forth.

You do not decide whether you have 'nothing to be sorry for' when someone explicitly told you something you have done has offended them.

I was. I understand your point, and the reason I haven't is that it's dishonest, disingenuous. I do not accept the concept of offence in the same way others do. What offends you might not offend me, and vice versa. I try to refuse to be afraid of causing offence - all I have to know is that my intent was not to do so. If we give in to that fear, nobody says anything, nobody dares speak, we all tiptoe around what we mean and the truth gets lost. In the wider world, it's that situation that bad actors exploit, and their apologies lose all meaning. 

 

I will apologise when I actually mean it, not because there is some weird convention that tries to oblige me to. There's nothing I want to hear less than a meaningless apology.

[Mickyblueeyes]

This is an awesome thread 

[grobyfox1990]

17 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I was. I understand your point, and the reason I haven't is that it's dishonest, disingenuous. I do not accept the concept of offence in the same way others do. What offends you might not offend me, and vice versa. I try to refuse to be afraid of causing offence - all I have to know is that my intent was not to do so. If we give in to that fear, nobody says anything, nobody dares speak, we all tiptoe around what we mean and the truth gets lost. In the wider world, it's that situation that bad actors exploit, and their apologies lose all meaning. 

 

I will apologise when I actually mean it, not because there is some weird convention that tries to oblige me to. There's nothing I want to hear less than a meaningless apology.

Tbf I agree with all that 

[ALC Fox]

The new retro range not having the Le Coq Sportif logo on it. What's the point? 

Edited 9 June 2023 by ALC Fox

[Finnegan]

1 hour ago, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Melissa McCarthy annoying.

 

1 hour ago, bovril said:

 

 

[Daggers]

8 hours ago, FoxesDeb said:

There's nothing wrong with using the word correctly is there?

 

Susie Dent, “the average active vocabulary of an adult English speaker is around 20,000 words, while his passive vocabulary is around 40,000 words.”

[TJQuik]

The fact that I still use instagram for multiple hours a day despite being incredibly annoyed by 90% of people I see on it

[TJQuik]

On 09/06/2023 at 16:18, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Those Melissa McCarthy Booking.com adverts soon got annoying.

I actually think she's a very good actor, but yeah most roles she's in are very annoying including that advert.

[Jon the Hat]

On 10/06/2023 at 01:09, Daggers said:

Susie Dent, “the average active vocabulary of an adult English speaker is around 20,000 words, while his passive vocabulary is around 40,000 words.”

You had me at Susie Dent..

[Parafox]

People stealing from charity shops. We have had around £80 of new goods taken in the last couple of weeks. We have no idea of donated stock that gets taken as only new goods can be subject to a stock-take

 

Most charity shops, if not all, have no CCTV or any security presence as it is a cost burden. 

 

Maybe this should be in the Absolute ***** topic.