Is there any topic which GD won't violently disagree on?

[FnG]magnolia

[FnG]magnolia

[FnG]magnolia

Caporegime
Joined
29 Aug 2007
Posts
28,597
Location
Auckland
Hello you beautiful babies :)

It seems that GD has become binary in opinion and things can only be:

  • GOOD - pretty good and we actively enjoy and/or endorse them; or
  • BAD - actually not that great, in fact sometimes pretty not okay at all now we come to think of it.
A top 10 list of topics which GD would make Schrodinger proud:
  1. Politics (including but not limited to Brexit, Trump, Marxism [added for Caracus2k cos he'll go mental otherwise and write a 32 page diatribe about something no one cares about])
  2. Issues of race
  3. Religion
  4. House prices
  5. Boomers
  6. Millenials
  7. Makers of graphics cards (can I get a LMAO?)
  8. Cyclists
  9. Car Owners
  10. Women
So, the question: is there any topic which GD won't violently disagree on?

Poll choices should be:
  1. Yes
  2. No
 

Pigeon_Killer

Pigeon_Killer

Pigeon_Killer

Caporegime
Joined
21 Nov 2005
Posts
40,417
Location
Cornwall
No.

Years ago I think everyone agreed the dude that got a picture of Ron Jeremy holding up a message for OcUK was a god but as he turned out to be a paedo rapist (Ron Jeremy, not the dude on here) that wouldn't even work.
 

deusexlumina

deusexlumina

deusexlumina

Soldato
Joined
12 Jun 2008
Posts
3,011
It's true, but it's also one of the things that always brings me back to GD. Just top notch entertainment at times.

Often I look at a thread when it's on page 2/3, and you'll catch this "moment" where one poster comes in and completely disagrees with another poster (who usually has a fairly benign opinion to start with).

The response, however, will be slightly inflammatory, make the quoted party look like a bit of a fool, and so it begins. Another 5/6 pages of flaming, where the argument derails from the original topic at hand (take your pick from the elemental topics highlighted by Mags) into what essentially boils down to semantics or the users definition/interpretation of a single word.

Sometimes I'm late to the party, see the thread has already reached page 9/10 and think to myself "damn, missed it". The millennial/boomer house price thread is the latest example, although the title of that thread was such post-bait that it was destined to degenerate instantaneously.
 

Jean-F

Jean-F

Jean-F

Man of Honour
Joined
14 Apr 2017
Posts
3,511
Location
London
Pigeon_Killer said:
No.

Years ago I think everyone agreed the dude that got a picture of Ron Jeremy holding up a message for OcUK was a god but as he turned out to be a paedo rapist (Ron Jeremy, not the dude on here) that wouldn't even work.
Click to expand...

While I’m not backing Ron Jeremy for a second, after reading your paedo rapist allegation, I Googled the incident.
All I could find was an allegation of sexual assault on a 15 y.o. at a party, north of Hollywood.
That’s certainly not a good idea, and morally outrageous, but being sexually attracted to a 15 y.o. isn’t the act of a paedophile, it comes under the heading of ephebophilia.
Neither condition is a good one to have I’d say.
 

StriderX

StriderX

StriderX

Caporegime
Joined
18 Mar 2008
Posts
32,747
Jean-F said:
While I’m not backing Ron Jeremy for a second, after reading your paedo rapist allegation, I Googled the incident.
All I could find was an allegation of sexual assault on a 15 y.o. at a party, north of Hollywood.
That’s certainly not a good idea, and morally outrageous, but being sexually attracted to a 15 y.o. isn’t the act of a paedophile, it comes under the heading of ephebophilia.
Neither condition is a good one to have I’d say.
Click to expand...

It's technically true, but the issue that matters is the age of consent, so reasonably they're still children.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom