|
Skarsnik posted:English libel law differentiates between opinions and statements From a strictly legalistic standpoint sure, but you would have thought context would matter, particularly when the person in question has, on multiple occasions outside of the specific exchange, unambiguously said exactly what she was obviously heavily suggesting. Oh no your honour, when I commented 'lol don't be a nazi don't get egged' under the photo of the guy who I've been openly, persistently, and viciously accusing of being a nazi for the last year and a half getting egged, I was actually just making a funny unserious joke.  (How this photo wasn't grounds for a libel case from JC himself I will never know) ThomasPaine fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Dec 20, 2021 |
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:From a strictly legalistic standpoint sure, but you would have thought context would matter, particularly when the person in question has, on multiple occasions outside of the exchange in question, unambiguously said exactly what she was obviously suggesting. Because it says corbyn is a racist endeavour, not corbyn is a racist It's absolute bullshit the lot of it If any reasonable person, including the judge knew what she was implying that should be seen as a statement, but thats not the way Ken Clarke wrote it back in Skarsnik fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Dec 20, 2021 |
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:09
|
|
|
If you're on TV I don't think you should have rights. Like any rights, you should be allowed to be hunted for sport.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:15
|
|
|
Skarsnik posted:Because it says corbyn is a racist endeavour, not corbyn is a racist Doesn't this hold as much water as "I am going to commit a heinous crime* in minecraft"?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
Can’t vouch for the veracity but  
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:34
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:If you're on TV I don't think you should have rights. Like any rights, you should be allowed to be hunted for sport.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
Z the IVth posted:Doesn't this hold as much water as "I am going to commit a heinous crime* in minecraft"? I am very much not a lawyer but going by the fact she has not in fact been sued into oblivion then probably
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/WillHayCardiff/status/1473037532397019145 I know this is Just How Things Are Done, but I really wish 1) Embargoes could be set for a sensible time, and 2) Journalists wouldn't loving tease this stuff with 'I know something important but I can't tell you what it is' so people don't have to choose between staying up late for something anticlimactic or going to bed worrying about what might happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:41
|
|
|
Was it her that said the idea of Corbyn being elected gave her panic attacks about pogroms against Jewish people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:41
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:Was it her that said the idea of Corbyn being elected gave her panic attacks about pogroms against Jewish people. Reminds me when Gorgeous George claimed that if Scotland got independence there'd be pogroms against Catholics. Good company for Rachel to be in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
Aidan_702 posted:Can’t vouch for the veracity but Yes you should test right before the event or your start travelling or whatever but this is just how testing works? It would be a bad test if it gave results like 'hmmm, something seems a bit off but I can't be sure' or 'yeah I think you might have something there'.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:45
|
|
|
You can see the start of a positive result in the third one as well. It’s faint, but it’s there.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:Was it her that said the idea of Corbyn being elected gave her panic attacks about pogroms against Jewish people. I think that was Rafael Behr who claimed he worried himself into a legit medical crisis
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:47
|
|
|
You're either positive or negative so the speed of turning positive is "it happens instantly" What an idiot
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:Was it her that said the idea of Corbyn being elected gave her panic attacks about pogroms against Jewish people. If it wasn't it was definitely someone who moved in the same weirdo twitter circles and she'll have probably RT'd it. I do not for a second believe that anyone earnestly thought Jeremy loving Corbyn was going to start sending his momentum blackshirts to round up Britain's Jews when he got into power and anyone who said otherwise was either: 1 - a deliberate poo poo stirring bad faith actor and all round worthless piece of poo poo who knew exactly what they were doing 2 - genuinely one of the dumbest people on the planet, a miracle they remember to breathe, just a complete lack of any critical faculties whatsoever
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:56
|
|
|
JeremoudCorbynejad posted:You're either positive or negative so the speed of turning positive is "it happens instantly" Yeah, I've no idea how they though it would go?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2021 23:58
|
|
|
It’s a strong positive band, so I can see why they were surprised. You’d think there would be more gradient. When I had covid my first test was pretty subtle.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:08
|
|
|
killerwhat posted:It’s a strong positive band, so I can see why they were surprised. You’d think there would be more gradient. When I had covid my first test was pretty subtle. Yeah, the lateral flow is an ‘analogue’ test. It went from subtle to fully bright in the space of a few hours which never really happened with the other variants. You don’t inhale covid and flip a switch that goes to infected and 100% detectable
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:11
|
|
|
Aidan_702 posted:Yeah, the lateral flow is an ‘analogue’ test. It went from subtle to fully bright in the space of a few hours which never really happened with the other variants. I mean if you did, you could just not flip that switch and this poo poo would all be over.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:12
|
|
|
Red Oktober posted:You can see the start of a positive result in the third one as well. It’s faint, but it’s there. Ah yes flashbacks to when my wife was taking home pregnancy tests. At times it was like staring at Norse runestones trying to figure out what they say.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:If it wasn't it was definitely someone who moved in the same weirdo twitter circles and she'll have probably RT'd it. That second group you mention are earnest though. She's probably not dumb, she has an undergraduate degree in maths. What if she did a Calculus and the answer said "Jeremy Corbyn Pogroms".
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:22
|
|
|
I have an undergraduate degree and it's never stopped me from being an idiot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I have an undergraduate degree and it's never stopped me from being an idiot. A lot of people get a degree and then decide they now have a qualification in Everything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I have an undergraduate degree and it's never stopped me from being an idiot. Some of us have PhDs and can be major league idiots! Unrelated: I thought Rachel Riley had already lost that case against Mike Sivier earlier this year. https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/rachel-riley-loses-latest-round-of-libel-battle-with-corbyn-supporting-blogger/
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
That Rachel Riley ruling is pretty "special". Seems you could make some super honeypots with it - say, post something controversial like the newspaper front page with the judges "Enemies of the People" or one of Piers Corbyn's insane and increasingly violent screeds, with a "sarcastic" "totally agree" (add a couple of smileys), then wait for someone to say you're encouraging violence and bam, you can sue them. Obviously IANAL so don't actually do this, or if you do, make sure you also tweet that you're being "mischievous". It's pretty sad though, like with that Rafael guy giving himself a heart attack over Jeremy Corbyn, Rachel went through this court action not because she was really hurt by that tweet, not for real monetary gain, but simply to screw up someone who pushed back against her and to make them hurt. But taking someone to court has got to be one of the most stressful things you can do, so to do it to yourself, and have to deal with that while having a baby, that's just punishing yourself (and her poor babby).
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
Failed Imagineer posted:Kale is good when you marinade it in a lil soy sauce/tamari (actually I prefer to use Trader Joe's Soyaki sauce or something similar), and then bang em into the air-fryer until they're a lil crispy. God tier zero-cal snack Wait you have Trader Joe's in Ireland?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:34
|
|
|
Jaeluni Asjil posted:Some of us have PhDs and can be major league idiots! Aren't you literally more qualified to do riley's job than she is lmao
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
Marmaduke! posted:That Rachel Riley ruling is pretty "special". Seems you could make some super honeypots with it - say, post something controversial like the newspaper front page with the judges "Enemies of the People" or one of Piers Corbyn's insane and increasingly violent screeds, with a "sarcastic" "totally agree" (add a couple of smileys), then wait for someone to say you're encouraging violence and bam, you can sue them. Obviously IANAL so don't actually do this, or if you do, make sure you also tweet that you're being "mischievous". It's just capital op. One of the divers trying to rescue those kids from the cave was called a pedo by Elon Musk but a judge ruled that was just a joke, as though one of the most prominent people in the world calling you a pedo during a public dispute couldn't cause any harm. Not that Rachel Riley has that real capital, just that her comments align with capital's vampiric interests. Any court case could go either way if the judge squints enough.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:36
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:That second group you mention are earnest though. She's probably not dumb, she has an undergraduate degree in maths. What if she did a Calculus and the answer said "Jeremy Corbyn Pogroms". Oh she's 100% in the poo poo stirrer category but I've still not worked out the motive of a lot of them. It's a hell of a lot of effort to go to to save a few quid in tax. Feels like something more underhand and coordinated was going on than a bunch of rich freaks getting sweaty, but that way  lies.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:39
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:She's probably not dumb, she has an undergraduate degree in maths. Turns out you can be both highly intelligent and dumb!
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:A lot of people get a degree and then decide they now have a qualification in Everything. I just skipped the degree part.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:40
|
|
|
Marmaduke! posted:
On the contrary, that's actually extremely funny
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:41
|
|
|
If TERFery has shown anything very clearly it's that there's a certain prolific kind of person who is famous and rich and basically an utter wanker in every respect but possibly due to 90's poisoning, is desperately convinced that they are actually very hip and with it and the most progressive person in the universe, and they will go increasingly insane the more reality suggests otherwise, and unfortunately because of how society works, will drag the rest of us down with them rather than just being packed off to some sort of padded cell.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:42
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Aren't you literally more qualified to do riley's job than she is lmao Jaeluni is way overqualified for that. Rachel Riley and Carol Vorderman's jobs probably never involved much maths.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:42
|
|
|
Carol Vorderman does have a pile of qualifications though IIRC? And she is also apparently very good at maths?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:44
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Carol Vorderman does have a pile of qualifications though IIRC? And she is also apparently very good at maths? She has a third-class degree in Engineering* from Cambridge, and is probably very good at maths relatively. What I'm talking about is I doubt she would be making the maths part of the show herself? I mean it's not like Chris Tarrant was putting all those trivia questions together, they have staff for that kinda thing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:48
|
|
|
Brendan Rodgers posted:She has a third-class degree in maths from Cambridge, and is probably very good at maths relatively. Politely, have you ever watched the maths section of Countdown?
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:50
|
|
|
I assume that she has an earpiece where someone with a solver tells her what the best possible answer is. The maths on Countdown is not conceptually difficult and you can find an optimal solution for any numbers/target combination in a fraction of a second on a computer. The hard part is doing it on the spot, in your head, under pressure. I guess they like to have someone with a little mathematical credibility and a convincing attitude on just to sell the idea of the show, but it's hardly vital. If there is no earpiece then I have to admit she is very good at solving that one problem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:54
|
|
|
I guess they have to do the sums on the board quite rapidly which is probably a solid 100% of 'being good at maths' to most of the country PhD maths theses are just 100k words of increasingly complex sums with all the working
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 18:01 |
|
|
josh04 posted:Politely, have you ever watched the maths section of Countdown? Yeah I have. Des Lynham has presented Countdown, with his background in insurance, and Match of the Day. The host isn't making the whole show.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2021 00:56
|
|