Cyprus-Forum.com

[Maximus]

Erolz.

I have got no idea who he is.

I have no idea who you are either.

If we are going to go down the phantasical wishful thinking route, how would you find it if this zone managed to retain over time a level of difference in how it is policed that ended up leading to an explosion of local based creative and commercial activity along with a serious reduction in petty crime and littering and vandalism and new found community pride whilst still allowing in traditional police but only for serious 'real' crime as necessary but not for petty policing of law abiding citizens where police go looking for excuses to hassle people ? Yeah I know it is pretty unlikely outcome but then so are the ideas in your video link as far as I am concerned.

Debunk what he says, instead of diverting like all is fine and dandy in Chaz.

Your counter argument has zero substance.

There are no ideas in that video link, just a pretty simple message. Police are resigning, The governors dont give a damn about the lawlessness and Truckers refuse to deliver to rioting states.

And you want me to imagine Chaz? imagine 6 square blocks of Seattle hijacked and vandalized by morons who have declared their independence but like you have depicted above.... You have just spent 10 pages lecturing Paphitis about the US constitution.

Seriously......

[erolz66]

Erolz.

I have got no idea who he is.

I have no idea who you are either.

Well a little research can always help

Debunk what he says, instead of diverting like all is fine and dandy in Chaz.

If I must when I have time and as you have asked.

Your counter argument has zero substance.

Which was my point. Mine has zero substance just as I suspect his has as well based simply on who he is. Trying to make a point briefly by comparative analogy at the other end of the same scale.

Police are resigning, The governors dont give a damn about the lawlessness and Truckers refuse to deliver to rioting states.

Well all this would need to be checked because you can not take things on his word alone, if you had bothered to do any researched in to who he is, you should appreciate. I will , when I have time, make the effort but you could join in to. If you know of any main stream media outlets, that has any actual evidence and examples and indication of the actual scale of these things I would be more than happy to see them.

And you want me to imagine Chaz? imagine 6 square blocks of Seattle hijacked and vandalized by morons who have declared their independence but like you have depicted above.... You have just spent 10 pages lecturing Paphitis about the US constitution.

Seriously......

For what it is worth I do not think 'chaz' has or can have or even should have much long term future. I am however not convinced that it is as depicted by either end of the political spectrum of news outlets. I would guess on very limited information available and with little hard research that the reality is somewhere between the extreme depictions at either end. Not a Utopian commune of peace and love and not a dystopian nightmare of rampaging lawlessness and violence and decay either. More a small temporary space allowed to exist for a short period of time in the hopes of deescalating tensions between citizens and those that rule and police them in a very difficult time rather then escalating them. Seems worth a go to me given that the 'escalating' approach is also covered pretty well.

Was it really 10 ? I though I was lecturing him on his hypocrisy with regards to his claim of respecting US constitutional rights to peaceful protest vs his 'actions' that appeared at total odds to that claim, plus a bit of bill gates is not as close to esptein as trump reality thworn in, but as you like.

[Maximus]

its not really that important Erolz,

spare yourself the time and the brain power,

I think it is quite reasonable for police officers to be resigning. Considering the lawmakers of those cities want to defund them anyway and that its a pretty risky, life threatening job at the moment without any gratitude from the community.

Also, taking in to account the scale of looting and vandalism that has been going on. It is not beyond any stretch of even the wildest imagination that truckers wouldn't want to risk their lives making deliveries to such places.

Dude, if I was living in such a place, if my business got razed to the ground, I would be looking for the exit too. Not sticking around and banking on some police free utopia with the radical morons that did it.

This isn't rocket science mate.

[repulsewarrior]

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/y3zp ... thout-guns

Mental health. Police departments say 10% of their contact with the public involves a person with mental illness, and those with untreated symptoms account for more than 1 in 4 fatal police shootings.

Homelessness. A wave of anti-loitering laws across the country have essentially made it illegal to be homeless, and tasked cops with enforcement. In 2016, one police department in California reported that over 30% of incoming calls were about homeless people.

Traffic. Why are armed cops in charge of traffic safety, anyway? The economist Alex Tabarrok points out that many police killings occur at traffic stops, like the shooting of Philando Castile.

...many cities have already "defunded" their Police.

[repulsewarrior]

...only hours ago,



...hanging from trees, coincidence; nothing new, in "America"?

[Londonrake]

The short version

I know who I am and why I am here on this forum. Who are you Londonrake and why are YOU here on this forum ?

I am a 'seeker'. You Londonrake (and CG and Paphitis for that matter) are mere 'spouters'. Spouters will always resent and attack seekers.

----------------------

The full version and I could not give a tiny fraction of a fuck Londonrake if you or anyone else TLDR it, or if you lie about TLDRing it, for it's truth and value to me in writing it remains and is entirely divorced from anything you do.

I can't be arsed with all the interleaving quotes.

I think I made my points and I did so more for others than to influence you - which frankly, is always a pointless exercise. You're the epitome of a closed mind.

As ever you and some others that inevitably crawl out of the woodwork seem to prefer talking about me and my flaws and failings than the subject at hand. Fine by me. You Londonrake are a 'drive by' arguer. You pro actively zoom in, shoot off your opinions and zoom off again as quick as you can in order to avoid all possible retaliation.

This is what you do - every time. Bludgeon! Bludgeon. Bludgeon! It strikes me that, although you read people's posts your predominant thought is invariably "How can I counter this" rather than attempting to understand what they're trying to say. You argue purely for the sake of it. Strutting around the forum, "sorting people out" on any subject, Ardvark to Zulu. You get off on arguing.

Yes I am here to argue. I am not here to socialise. I am not here to make friends. I am not here to be liked. I am not here to show what a fun guy I am with my humour. I have the real world and a real life for all those things. I do not need to use this place as some surrogate for these things being lacking in my real life. Nor for that matter am I here stalking a former adversary from elsewhere, something I have no need for here or in real life.

Yes I bludgeon. I do not have time to waste, despite the accusations. I hammer home my points in the same way a barrister might hammer home their's in a court room. I do so knowing that is not an effective way of influencing others because I have no interest in trying to use this place to do so. That is what argument is. I engage in dialectic - the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions. It is a process. It requires back and forth. Proposal of thesis, antithesis, over and over seeking synthesis at the end. It requires challenge. It requires thought. It requires effort. That all you want to do is drive by and shoot of your opinion and have it left there without any challenge is not MY problem, it is yours. That you get upset by challenge as part of a dialectic process is not my problem.

Which is why the idea that I do not attempt to understand what the other person is saying is pure and utter bollocks. For what I am engaged in that is required, necessary and fundamental. And as ever I am prepared to put the effort in to that end because almost nothing of value is achieved without effort. For you on the other hand Londonrake, with what you are engaged in, with your drive by shooting off of opinions without challenge, understanding what the other person is trying to say is entirely irrelevant. Which is why you are far far far worse than me at the very thing you so casually drive by and accuse me off before screeching away again in a puff of tire smoke until your next drive by.

So yes you are right I will, without fear or favour, do my best to rip the arse out of woolly thinking, out of contradiction, out of lies, out of misinformation, out of hypocrisy, out of false or twisted logic, out of patent nonsense and BS, out of claims that 50 million people think X backed up by nothing other than prejudice, out of claims about what 'everyone' knows and many other enemies of genuine understanding ans synthesis. If you do not like that then in the words of GR you can and should just "piss off".

Speaking of which, you have a habit of arguing at length (always! )

Yes, what I am engaged in, dialectic - the art of investigating or discussing the truth of opinions, that is necessary and required.

And In the spirit of ripping the arse of of patent nonsense and BS and hypocrisy, you feigning to have issues with 'arguing at length' here is patent nonsense and BS. The clear and obvious reality is you only have issue with it when it is from someone who dares to try and challenge your drive by opinions and engage you in an actual dialectic process. To prove the truth of this I need merely to say one word. Paphitis.

and then, when challenged, saying something along the lines of "But I haven't expressed a view. I've only presented the facts which contradict yours" that's somewhat different from saying "I don't have a view on that" which I've done here.

And again we are back to your failings. Your failure to understand that is a result of having no need or desire to understand given what you are engaged in. Saying I do not think anyone can know yet if lockdown will be net negative or positive is my view and opinion. It is not an absence of view and opinion. It is a very simple and very clear and very well justified view and opinion that I have presented over and over again. That you STILL perceive that very simple clear oft repeated position as an unwillingness to take a position at all just shows how 'drive by' your engagement here is and why you are pretty much unable to ever understand even the simplest things the other person is saying as a result.

I don't recall you ever actually admitting your view clearly on whether you thought the UK should leave the EU or not.

Your tendency to mistake your failings as some kind of objective reality are not my fault or problem. I have stated clearly how I voted in the referendum and why. Many times. That is just plain fact easily shown. That you can not recall seeing that fact and then use your failure in sight and understanding as 'proof' of something that is patently false is exactly the kind of understanding that result from your 'drive by' approach. Do not blame me for it.

It was always cloaked in obfuscating BS about "We should have a say on how we leave". It's called having the courage of your convictions. Most of the time - you simply don't.

Yet more patent nonsense that could only come from someone engaged in shooting of drive by opinions. We first 'engaged' in discussion on Brexit as a direct result of me reacting to your drive by shooting off of opinions about Brexit. This occurred after the vote had happened. My position and firm convictions at that point in time was that having democratically chosen that we should leave the EU, the next stage was to decide, democratically, how we should leave. A simple, straight forward, clear and honest opinion, held and expressed with total conviction. That all you saw in your rear view mirror as you sped away having shot off your opinion was "obfuscating BS" just again shows the paucity of what you are engaged in here.

If people didn't break social distancing rules they could protest? What's that? Some sort of barking defence? Which planet are you on?

Well if you were prepared to make any effort at all you could easily discover than not only is protest within the limits of social distancing possible in theory it has been going on around the globe. From the senior citizen couple in their 80's in Australia protesting for the first time in their long lives in their their remote rural almost entirely white town on the edge of the outback to events across the UK involving 10s and hundreds of people like the one specific one I mention in St Albans. If you had of bothered to put in even a couple of minutes of effort, the kind of effort you routinely attempt to ridicule me for putting in, you would then see how ridiculous your claim that protests sparked by the video of George Floyd being murdered by police in broad daylight and in front of witnesses were "provided[ing] illegitimate cover for the naked promotion of anarchy. That is with a modicum of effort you might have understood the point I was trying to make. But that is not what you are engaged in here is it Londonrake ?

The rest? Well, I have better things to do. I will leave the last word to you - you absolutely always have the last word of course (Bludgeon! Bludgeon! Bludgeon!)

Some things I do not do or almost never do here or on forums generally

Make claims about the other person 'having to get the last word in'. They are pointless and stupid and childish and always apply to everyone to some degree or other and almost always including the accuser.
Make claims about what 50 million people think or know, or what 'we' think or know, or what 'everyone' thinks or knows backed up by no evidence at all.
Hide behind anonymity
Lie
Excessively use lol smileys, not to denote nuance that is missed in text only communication but purely to laugh at my own words in order to portray my 'superiority' over the person I am replying too, except recently and only 'in kind' to those that do such things incessantly.
Go out of my way to tell someone publicly TLDR - I just do it, I do not broadcast that I have done it.

I will just bail out of the thread at this point - for now

Of COURSE you will, for that is what you are engaged in here. Drive by. Bye Bye.

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah..................... There’s a novelty.

“Read NOT TO CONTRADICT AND CONFUTE, nor to believe and take for granted, but to weigh and consider.” You certainly could never be accused of the latter two.

Oops, nearly forgot. TLDR. And I’d be very surprised if that wasn’t a majority view.

[erolz66]

“Read NOT TO CONTRADICT AND CONFUTE, nor to believe and take for granted, but to weigh and consider.” You certainly could never be accused of the latter two.

Oops, nearly forgot. TLDR. And I’d be very surprised if that wasn’t a majority view.

Says the person who not only does not read what the other person has written but that then serially pro actively takes the time and effort to publicly boast about not having read what the other person has said.

[Londonrake]

This may come as a surprise. Most members of forums (ohh! I’ve made an assumption again!) tend to enjoy discussing/debating topical, or indeed historical events with a certain element of brevity. That way sometimes the miracle of rapport surfaces. Few are inclined to write, or want to plough their way through, another member’s 1000 word dissertation on a subject. It’s tedious/boring. So, they will tend not to bother.

Let me put it another way. On the whole the vitality and interest sparking soul of a forum often depends on the “drive by” people, or even the one-liners, rather than those who tend to turn their responses, often to short, succinct views, into an equivalent of the book of Genesis

I hope that doesn’t prove too upsetting a revelation.

[erolz66]

This may come as a surprise. Most members of forums (ohh! I’ve made an assumption again!) tend to enjoy discussing/debating topical, or indeed historical events with a certain element of brevity. That way sometimes the miracle of rapport surfaces. Few are inclined to write, or want to plough their way through, another member’s 1000 word dissertation on a subject. It’s tedious/boring. So, they will tend not to bother.

Let me put it another way. On the whole the vitality and interest sparking soul of a forum often depends on the “drive by” people, or even the one-liners, rather than those who tend to turn their responses, often to short, succinct views, into an equivalent of the book of Genesis

I hope that doesn’t prove too upsetting a revelation.

When someone has to base their argument on what 'most other people' know or do it is almost always an indication of the weakness of their argument. Somemone who serially does this shows serial weakness in their arguments.

So just how much briefer exactly do you think your post here was cyprus45751-280.html#p897969 vs my reply to it that promoted, yet again, your standard (and inherently dishonest and boring) TLDR complaints ? I know because I have put in the effort to find out That is what I do. what do you think Londonrake ? Go on have a guess.

All you reveal is aspects of yourself for as upsetting as this revelation may come to you, you can not and do not talk with any legitimacy for anyone but yourself. Aspects like your honesty. You TLDR my post yet appear to 'get' the drive by reference. How remarkable

[Londonrake]

This may come as a surprise. Most members of forums (ohh! I’ve made an assumption again!) tend to enjoy discussing/debating topical, or indeed historical events with a certain element of brevity. That way sometimes the miracle of rapport surfaces. Few are inclined to write, or want to plough their way through, another member’s 1000 word dissertation on a subject. It’s tedious/boring. So, they will tend not to bother.

Let me put it another way. On the whole the vitality and interest sparking soul of a forum often depends on the “drive by” people, or even the one-liners, rather than those who tend to turn their responses, often to short, succinct views, into an equivalent of the book of Genesis

I hope that doesn’t prove too upsetting a revelation.

When someone has to base their argument on what 'most other people' know or do it is almost always an indication of the weakness of their argument. Somemone who serially does this shows serial weakness in their arguments.

So just how much briefer exactly do you think your post here was cyprus45751-280.html#p897969 vs my reply to it that promoted, yet again, your standard (and inherently dishonest and boring) TLDR complaints ? I know because I have put in the effort to find out That is what I do. what do you think Londonrake ? Go on have a guess.

All you reveal is aspects of yourself for as upsetting as this revelation may come to you, you can not and do not talk with any legitimacy for anyone but yourself. Aspects like your honesty. You TLDR my post yet appear to 'get' the drive by reference. How remarkable

Well done! But even you can’t have it both ways. “He’s a “drive by” poster but - wait a minute - look at this!“

At least I get your juices flowing.

I see the smiley habit is catching on.