Dannyboy-the-Dane
-
Posts
14942 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Dannyboy-the-Dane
-
-
Aye, I'd say the file size limit is more annoying than the image size limit. But it's not really something that bothers me a lot. I try to keep things simple.
-
I realise why I've stayed away from this thread before. It's because most people's days are usually shit. Come on, peoples, you're bringing the mood down.
Doesn't anything good ever happen to you? It could be anything. Like today, I started school again. Now I'm in the third year and thus the oldest, and in a year I graduate and can get into uni to study my favourite subjects. Plus it was lovely too see everyone again and get into a daily rhythm. 
-
Paj Meen Ah, why the vote for Jonnas?
-
And here I thought Kakunas could be hard as steel ...
Vote: No Lynch
-
-
I find it amazing that a lot of people seem to presume that ultimately there are no qualified women out there. Yes, people should be selected on merit but by simply stating "but then it may lead to positive discrimination" suggest you believe there is an unequal balance in potentially qualified candidates.
Or, put more simply, have you tested everyone? :p
It may seem like we think that, but I, for one, really don't. It's just to make it simpler for the sake of understanding.
The issue is that they're not being selected by skills and qualification only - they're also selected by how popular they are with other members (as they have votes, in politics, at least), and as a majority are arsey old men, they like other arsey old men as it's "an old-boys club".And that's not acceptable, of course. But I really don't think the solution is to make rules regarding gender and the like. It's hypocritical, I find.
-
Do you honestly believe they would set up a policy that states "A woman must be in one of the top positions, even if the woman has the IQ of a squirrel." There would be contingency plans in the sake of a gender drought, even if someone is temporary appointed. Arguing a point on something that is blatantly not going to happen is absurd.
What about a shake up in the structure, why not two deputy prime ministers? Why not a group of representatives for each large subsection of the British population; gender, race and possibly religion but that's a different issue unto itself. Although it would probably raise taxes so nobody is going to support that if we're honest. But a fair representation needs to be had.
Can anyone look at this and believe it to be fair? Without some bullshit "well there probably ain't no good womens for it" retort. Start at the base, start with education. It has worked for other areas (such as maths and what not), by showing girls that they can become MPs, firefighters, UFC champion or whatever the hell they aspire to be.
Okay so maybe not a sake of representation of each gender, but the old 'two heads are better than one' saying. There are a variety of ways in which issues can be addressed and perhaps a female and male perspective (and yes, they will be relatively minor in terms of all the different potential perspectives) would be beneficial.
Or if we're going back to those earlier stereotypes on gender roles; who is it in a typical household that takes care of the finances? Not necessarily earns the money, but knows where it's coming and going?
I like your idea about showing girls what they can be and them aspiring to become it, as you're probably right that more women in higher positions isn't a bad thing, However, I really find the idea of "equal representation" very, ironically enough, unequal. I'm not really sure if you're advocating a rule about 50/50 representation or merely see a more equal representation as something potentially positive. In any case, I still think people should only be selected based on skills and qualification - even if that means the whole staff becomes male/female.
-
Pretty much. To me, it's unfair to ignore the fact that there are differences. If the job was about heavy lifting, you'd get 10 guys and 10 girls. I bet the top 10 is a ratio of 8:2 or something. So thats the ratio that should be hired; the 10 that are best at the job. But what Harriet Harman is saying is that it should be 5:5, which is ridiculous. Men are stronger more often. They just are. The means weight lifting world record is bigger than the womens. The mens 100m world record is shorter than the womens. That doesn't mean eveyr man is faster than every woman, but it means that as a general rule, men are faster than women. So if it's relevant, it should be permitted to be taken into consideration.
Good, then I both understood you right and agree with you.
-
I also have a bit of a problem with the equality argument in the first place. We say we can't decide whether or not to give a job to someone based on gender, right? But fact is, there are differences, and rather than ignore them, shouldn't we embrace them? I'm not saying simply the fact that someone is female or male should affect an employers decision, but the differences between them shouldn't be ignored, as has to be done in order to prevent getting sued.
Ancedotal example: my friends English teacher was pregnant last year, and was constantly off work from about October to late April. I'm talking 2 weeks off, 1 week on, 2 weeks off. This meant that his class were hit really hard, getting taught in patches by teachers of various speciality in the subject. However, because it was a pregancy thing, it came down to a gender discrimination thing, and so the head was unable to change his classes teacher or to hire a temp for them. Therefore, my friend was taught English really badly, failed his exam, and now has to resit it this year instead of doing the Advanced Higher Geography class he wanted to do. This will affect his ability to get into the Uni course he wants, and will thereby affect the rest of his life.
What I'm saying is; people should not be allowed to hire a girl just because a an employer wants a pretty face in the office (unless her looks are going to affect her ability to do the job), but equally it is unfair to disallow employers from taking action when something like that does have an effect.
I feel like I'm not getting my point across very well. Basically: I'm against any form of positive discrimination.
From what I understand the basic gist of your post is: Focus on the practical facts, even if they're gender related, but not on the gender itself. Am I right?
-
In other news, where the heck are my glasses? Raaaargh! I think I may have to set traps. Spectacles like peanut butter, right?
Mine usually like marmalade. But they're also kinda ... strange ...
-
You can just draw something on paper, take a photo, or actually make some sort of hybrid as well. For example, you could cellotape a walkie talkie to a pidgeon and take a photo. The talkie-pidgeon could be sent into hostage negotiation situations to open up communications with the hostage taker. I imagine the hilarity of an armed man yelling orders into a pidgeon would at least ease the stress of the hostages, if nothing else. Probably send the gunman over the edge and cause him to start shooting though.
That image actually sent me into a laughing fit! XD
-
they are pretty damn fun, and its hard when you are getting grilled live
least on the threads you have a few more minutes to compose a response instead of people throwing question upon question on you!@danny: there WAS NO TEAM when you killed me off it was only you left.
To be fair it probably wouldn't have mattered anyway. People didn't really care much for my voting behaviour arguments - maybe it was simply too ironic, or I argued my case too well last time
- and I'm pretty sure you were a goner in any case.Still, could you please stop going so hard on me? I know it's in jest, but it's kinda making me feel bad. Perhaps it was a bad move, all right - but can't we just please leave it there?
-
How reliable is the first post? I can't agree with her if that's what she advocates. I think women are already emancipated and don't get into these jobs because either they don't care about or there hasn't been a woman that qualified more than a men for the job.
The problem is it's probably hard to ever find out. And I have to say I agree with Danny here. I've always felt that diverse gender/race/whatever representation simply for the sake of diverse gender/race/whatever representation is ridiculous. We should employ whoever's best for the job with no regard for gender what so ever. That's equality. Also, it annoys me that there are still places where women are treated unequally, but also places where men are treated unequally. Take for example her comment. Whatever she meant by it, you can be absolutely 100 % sure that if the genders were reversed, hell would break lose and people would get humiliated in public - and we'd all say he had it coming. Feminism stands for equality. Unfortunately it's often seen represented by crazy misandric women. I am not saying the woman in question is misandric, but her comment certainly is, and even if it was a slip of the tongue, it seems to me as a Freudian slip.
Wow, a lot of comments in no particular order. Hope it makes sense.
-
Live mafia was awesome, except for my dirty backstabbing subordinate
DON BITCH IS NOT HAPPY. ¬_____¬
I did it for the team! *cries*
-
'The joke is, one nun says "Where's the soap?" and the other nun says, "Yes it does, doesn't it?" The second nun thought she heard: "Wears the soap" as in something she was doing to the soap caused it to wear down...'
So there we have it...
Dear GOD, what a bad joke!
-
My sister makes me laugh too hard.
She's 13, and she's beyond-her-years maturity wise. She's besties with all my work-friends who are all 20+, and she can actually make topical jokes and stuff, stunningly.
ANYWAY.
This morning I sat down at the breakfast table, really oblivious to everything, still quite sleepy. My sister bursts into the room and screams "WHO THE HECK IS LENNE!?", making me jump so high. At first I responded with "What!?"
Then I realised it's a Final Fantasy X-2 reference, and I loved on too many levels.
And then I came back from work earlier, and there were post-it notes all over my room saying "WHO THE HECK IS LENNE!?!?!". The was one inside my laptop, and on my mirror, and on my TV screen. It was as though she had planned it so well - I opened my cupboard and found one attatched to every single shirt I own. I just started clapping.
And then half an hour later, I went to the toilet, lifted up the seat and there was a post-it note inside the toilet. Actually in the bowl, sitting there. And I burst out laughing uncontrollably.
I just love so much, considering it's such a random thing to make such a big deal out of.
Brilliant!
-
Indeed, good game. Too bad we were unlucky in the beginning, but the town did play well.
Especially kudos to Rummy, you were a great newbie! -
Oh, no, we've not played those. Some powers are generally needed to get things rolling somewhat but not everyone needs a power. The closest thing to what you're talking about would be my Bare Bones Mafia.I don't think a fully vanilla forum mafia would translate too well. I think the reason powers are around are probably to make forum mafias a little more exciting.
That's kinda what I've been arguing the whole time, guys.
But anyway, it's good to hear we agree. -
No, it just seems more...creepy coming from you than Moogle because he has a reputation for it
That's just hilarious!
X-DAlso, sorry to hear that, nightwolf. I hope they get it sorted out.
-
-
Go and read the very first mafia game we had. It was run by chairdriver, just look at his started threads and you'll find it.
Edit: Here you go
But that game also contains night powers and is thus not completely vanilla. It's the total vanilla games I'm interested in - where no one has any powers and where the only thing to go by are the posts made by people - those are the ones I am curious as to how work.
It's funny to see the humble beginnings of mafia games on N-Europe. No one really knew how to play then.
-
Don't worry Dan, you're not that bad. I don't think anyone could compete with Offerman in terms of sexual harassment/innuendo. He was the main reason this forum was almost female free back in the C-E days.
Well, I don't think I've managed to scare any female members away in the time I've been here, so I feel relieved.
-
A guy is out playing golf with a priest. On hole 6, the guy misses a shot and shouts: "Damn, I missed!" The priest looks at him and says: "Now, son, don't use that kind of language, or the Lord will smite you."
Later on, on hole 12, the guy misses again and shouts: "Damn, I missed!" The priest once again warns him that using that kind of language will call down the Lord's anger upon him.
Having avoided cursing for the rest of the game, the guy misses a shot on hole 18 and once again cries out: "Damn, I missed!" At that exact moment, the priest is hit by a lighting bolt, and a thunderous voice from above says:
"Damn, I missed!"
-
A forum legend. Someone who could make a sexual reference out of ANYTHING. Quicker than Flink, Dan Dare or myself could make an Arnie reference out of something. Was a big fan of anal despite not having tried it. Then as soon as he got a girlfriend he grounded down, and when enquired about anal he told me he had done it with his missus and it didn't seem he was as enthusiastic over it as when it was a mystery to him.
Wow. Am I that bad at sexual jokes? I'd say Moogle is a worthy candidate, too.
I Can Has Lolcats?
in General Chit Chat
Posted
That's ... just wrong.