SCP blocked for non opt-inners.

[User32269]

Not long had a brisk 12 mile ride in the cold evening air. Feel good but think I have a build up of fallactic acid in the old legs.

 

[User10119]

I thought it obvious I wasn't being entirely serious, but perhaps it wasn't.

Although I don't know anyone who uses those words in real life, and if I did with my cycling group I would probably be banned for rubbish patter.

Liar, liar, pants on fire! You have, I do believe, at least _met_ me. And I've used all of those, with the exception of straw man, out in the big blue room. In fact I used substantive just last week - and what's more it was in combination with a 'serious' and a 'significant'.

 

[Pale Rider]

I don't either, heck, I work in catering, bain-marie is a big word for us

Simple, short sentences are the most effective.

Any words with more than one syllable should be used with caution.

There's even a recognised formula - the fog index - which grades the readability of text.

Looks a bit complicated, but it's saying the same thing, short words and sentences are easier to read.

http://www.readabilityformulas.com/gunning-fog-readability-formula.php

 

[Pat "5mph"]

[QUOTE 4681239, member: 10119"]Liar, liar, pants on fire! You have, I do believe, at least _met_ me. And I've used all of those, with the exception of straw man, out in the big blue room. In fact I used substantive just last week - and what's more it was in combination with a 'serious' and a 'significant'.[/QUOTE]
Hehehe, we have established that @Pale Rider was not listening!

 

[Pale Rider]

[QUOTE 4681239, member: 10119"]Liar, liar, pants on fire! You have, I do believe, at least _met_ me. And I've used all of those, with the exception of straw man, out in the big blue room. In fact I used substantive just last week - and what's more it was in combination with a 'serious' and a 'significant'.[/QUOTE]

OK, OK, I don't know anyone apart from Crinkly Lion who uses those words.

Mind you, when we met it was dog o'clock at a LEL control, by which time I was close to talking jibberish and certainly in no position to analyse the language of others.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Any words with more than one syllable should be used with caution.

Some languages have very few of those words
Just jesting with you, but disagreeing a wee bit too

 

[pubrunner]

You can't ban certain words and phrases, it would ruin my game of SCP bingo.

Ever played 'Monkey' bingo ?

 

[jonny jeez]

I don't mean it's an inauthentic persona - I just mean it's different to the one in the pub. Or in a letter. Or on the bike. Or on another bit of the internet. It's inevitable that it will be, because the form is different. You may as well make that work in for you rather than against. We are all, for example, the same size here. I hope you don't think it's unfair if I suggest that, although being a person of robust character and strong opinions, you typically avoid conflict. That's not wrong, but I would say that for a small woman it's more essential in the pub than it is on here, so it doesn't need to be that way. When people on here say 'you wouldn't say that to my face', they are just acknowledging that the form of interaction deprives them of their ability to silence you by intimidation. Good.

Oh and thanks for the kind words.

But physical intimidation is not the only form of intimidation. If its wrong to use your physical advantage to intimidate, how is it OK to use other features of ones form.

Education, Intellect, Experience, Upbringing, Profession, Social Position, Rank I've seen some "Big Men" brought to the edge by intimidation in these forms.

I detest bullying, in any form, whether its group or pack intimidation, arrogant intellectual intimidation, physical intimidation...they are all as shite as each other.

its right to argue in defence of those who are intimidated, in any form. Those who are truly smart don't seek to use their advantage, whatever it happens to be, to intimidate.

Those who aren't that smart...just aren't that smart.

 

[steve50]

To be honest, more recently I too have been just reading the posts on this forum rather than participating, it got to a stage where I simply gave up posting because of the snide comments and putdowns from a minority of members who (it would appear) sole purpose in life is to disrupt any reasonable discussion on any subject and turn it into an argument. SC&P didn't really interest me as I am not a great fan of political discussion. I now understand why politics and religion are two subjects that are banned on many internet forums after seeing the disruption these two subjects can cause. CC has been a great source of information for me and I have enjoyed the interaction with some of the members, alas the time has also come for me to step back from the forum, I might look in from time to time but for now, thanks to those of you who have been civilized and respectful.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

I've seen some "Big Men" brought to the edge by intimidation in these forms.

 

[jay clock]

I come to CC to talk about cycling and related areas. My vote would be to simply shut down all areas that were not fairly directly cycling linked

Never go in the non cycling areas but reading the 15 pages above, I can confirm I am glad

 

[jonny jeez]

View attachment 337566

so, despite your attempt to poke fun...which, by the way is in really poor taste and deserves reporting...you support intimidation of people by whatever means you feel fit...is that correct?

 

[Shaun]

It's been interesting, thanks, but I think this is a good point to take a time out.

I've still got some work to do before I enable the opt-in; I'll post to let everyone know when I do.

Cheers,
Shaun