Disgusted

Arguments will be moved here. Obey the first and second rules.

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

User avatar
jjmick
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:25 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Brompton-on-Swale

Re: Disgusted

Post by jjmick » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:33 pm

comeondarlo wrote:It's an arguement about fuck all
Morals, discrimination, taking the piss about a helpless condition. Hardly fuck all.
Darlo till I die!!

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Quakerz » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:33 pm

comeondarlo wrote:It's an arguement about fuck all, now the PC crowd have turned up; it's doing my head in!
Nobody from the PC crowd has turned up. Darlo Rob is simply trying to further his agenda and get me struck off - faking PC outrage is his weapon of choice. Good for him I say.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

Darlo Cockney
Posts: 1209
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:31 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Darlo Cockney » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:34 pm

Quakerz wrote:
Darlo Cockney wrote:Paul

I know that you did not realise that the guy had a speech impediment, but now that you do, you should undoubtedly apologise.

If you had a special needs kid and someone took the piss out of them, then I know that you would justifiably be angry.

Everyone makes mistakes............ you will get a hell of a lot more respect if you do the right thing.

DC
I've tried to be honest and it took me until the second half to click on that he had a speech problem, even when I said "his stammering is grating on me" I still didn't think "oh hang on, he actually has a stammer" to myself. I just presumed that he was being crap today. I presumed that because he talked so much that he just kept on fucking up.

I'm not going to say this anymore, I was criticising his commentary
Paul - You were wrong to have a go at him - fact - hindsight is wonderful.

Apologise and move on mate.

DC
Started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left.

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:34 pm

comeondarlo wrote:It's an arguement about fuck all, now the PC crowd have turned up; it's doing my head in!
u dont have to read it to be fair

comeondarlo
Posts: 2801
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:54 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: A Swimming Pool (usually).

Re: Disgusted

Post by comeondarlo » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:36 pm

You're right, goodnight

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:36 pm

hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Quakerz » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:37 pm

jjmick wrote:
comeondarlo wrote:It's an arguement about fuck all
Morals, discrimination, taking the piss about a helpless condition. Hardly fuck all.
Nobody discriminated against anybody, nobody willingly took the piss about a helpless condition.

Fuck me if the commentator reads this he'll be more annoyed at the people trying to paint him as a helpless almost fucking disabled helpless victim, than he will be at what I said!

Clearly Darlo Rob has scored points with you.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Quakerz » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:39 pm

Darlo Cockney wrote:
Paul - You were wrong to have a go at him - fact - hindsight is wonderful.

Apologise and move on mate.

DC
I wasn't wrong to have a go at him because he wasn't good enough. I'm not interested in discussing it with you any further.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

User avatar
DL5
Posts: 4629
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:26 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DL5 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:40 pm

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
Maybe a blind bus driver could have a co pilot to tell him when to turn the corner, that would work, right? :think:
.

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:42 pm

DL5 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
Maybe a blind bus driver could have a co pilot to tell him when to turn the corner, that would work, right? :think:
How about a deaf call-person? They could have a helper to tell them what the person on the phone is saying, unless of course the deaf person's helper had no arms, in which case he would need a helper to tell the deaf person what his helper was saying.

Darlo_Rob
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:23 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Darlo_Rob » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:43 pm

Eh? Further my agenda, what agenda? I'm highlighting what some posters typed in the match thread and I asked for an apology in the first post of this thread. If that wasn't forthcoming then I suggested a ban.

You trying to justify your actions is spineless.

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:44 pm

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
again, yes, in theory, he could know everything about mechanics there is to know, then he could pass on his knowledge - or he could get prosthetic arms fitted and probably do the job himself

how do u know that no-one would hire either of them, either the mechanic/mute radio person if they can do the job as good anyone else then its illegal to not give them the job because of their disability, its not silliness - its fact

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:46 pm

hodgie1 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
again, yes, in theory, he could know everything about mechanics there is to know, then he could pass on his knowledge - or he could get prosthetic arms fitted and probably do the job himself

how do u know that no-one would hire either of them, either the mechanic/mute radio person if they can do the job as good anyone else then its illegal to not give them the job because of their disability, its not silliness - its fact
:lol:

You're really not getting the point of these hypothetical questions, are you?

User avatar
jjmick
Posts: 1572
Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2010 4:25 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Brompton-on-Swale

Re: Disgusted

Post by jjmick » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:47 pm

Quakerz wrote:
jjmick wrote:
comeondarlo wrote:It's an arguement about fuck all
Morals, discrimination, taking the piss about a helpless condition. Hardly fuck all.
Nobody discriminated against anybody, nobody willingly took the piss about a helpless condition.

Fuck me if the commentator reads this he'll be more annoyed at the people trying to paint him as a helpless almost fucking disabled helpless victim, than he will be at what I said!

Clearly Darlo Rob has scored points with you.
I said the condition was helpless i.e. it's not his fault he does it. It's just plain cuntish to quote what he said in a mocking way.
Darlo till I die!!

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:47 pm

DL5 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
Maybe a blind bus driver could have a co pilot to tell him when to turn the corner, that would work, right? :think:
no, because thats not a reasonable adjustment, it would effect health and safety hence the wod 'reasonable'

User avatar
loan_star
Posts: 7101
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2009 9:01 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by loan_star » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:48 pm

Its one of the reasons I wouldnt want to co-commentate, other than the fact that I swear too much and people cant understand a word I say, when people who have some journalistic training cant even survive without being abused for whatever reason then whoever does it is on a hiding to nothing.
Personally I thought that despite a couple of misused words Garry did a good job today to keep the listener informed about what was going on. I cant comment on Nicks commentary at Tamworth but to be fair, having been at that game, I dont think anyone could have found any positives to come out with. If the game is shite and theres naff all happening then what the fuck is he meant to say?
Fucks sake, even Kevan Smith and Martin Gray, who can provide professional insight into a game, get slated too.

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:49 pm

hodgie1 wrote:
DL5 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
Maybe a blind bus driver could have a co pilot to tell him when to turn the corner, that would work, right? :think:
no, because thats not a reasonable adjustment, it would effect health and safety hence the wod 'reasonable'
AHA, so you think having a helper for a mute person on the radio is reasonable? I fucking don't.

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:49 pm

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
again, yes, in theory, he could know everything about mechanics there is to know, then he could pass on his knowledge - or he could get prosthetic arms fitted and probably do the job himself

how do u know that no-one would hire either of them, either the mechanic/mute radio person if they can do the job as good anyone else then its illegal to not give them the job because of their disability, its not silliness - its fact
:lol:

You're really not getting the point of these hypothetical questions, are you?
yep, i believe i am

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Quakerz » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:50 pm

Darlo_Rob wrote:Eh? Further my agenda, what agenda? I'm highlighting what some posters typed in the match thread and I asked for an apology in the first post of this thread. If that wasn't forthcoming then I suggested a ban.

You trying to justify your actions is spineless.
Spineless?

Take a step away from the constant "he must be banned", "he's a bully/outrage/scumbag" rhetoric first of all because you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of...

Then, once you do that, explain to me how sticking to my guns and refusing to cave in to you is "spineless"?

Thanks.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:51 pm

hodgie1 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
again, yes, in theory, he could know everything about mechanics there is to know, then he could pass on his knowledge - or he could get prosthetic arms fitted and probably do the job himself

how do u know that no-one would hire either of them, either the mechanic/mute radio person if they can do the job as good anyone else then its illegal to not give them the job because of their disability, its not silliness - its fact
:lol:

You're really not getting the point of these hypothetical questions, are you?
yep, i believe i am
Trust me, you're not. You're editing the conditions as you know I'm right and can't force yourself to say "no, I wouldn't hire a no-armed mechanic". Hypothetical questions can't be fucking edited by a third-party. You need to answer them as they are as they aren't real situations.

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:56 pm

DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:
DL5 wrote:
DarloOnTheUp wrote:
hodgie1 wrote:well, actually yes, as in theory he could sign then a speaking person could relay what the mute was saying, if a mute applied to commentate on footie, and proved that with the aid of a speaking person he could do the job, then the radio station couldnt not give him the job because hes a mute, its called 'reasonable adjustment' in law
Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?
Maybe a blind bus driver could have a co pilot to tell him when to turn the corner, that would work, right? :think:
no, because thats not a reasonable adjustment, it would effect health and safety hence the wod 'reasonable'
AHA, so you think having a helper for a mute person on the radio is reasonable? I fucking don't.
u mis understand reasonable adjustment, if by getting a co-commentator that the mute signs to enables the mute to do the job, then so be it, 'reasonable adjustment' is enshrined in law, so it doesnt matter what u think really, i accept that in practice it probably wouldnt work

darloviper
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:30 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Durham

Re: Disgusted

Post by darloviper » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:58 pm

I tell you what next home game lets have a blind person doing the commentary on the game eh?

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 7:58 pm

hodgie1 wrote:i accept that in practice it probably wouldnt work
Bingo. I thank you and good night.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Quakerz » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:00 pm

darloviper wrote:I tell you what next home game lets have a blind person doing the commentary on the game eh?
They could pick almost anybody from the crowd.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:00 pm

Yes, but nobody would actually hire him.

How about THIS then? A no-armed mechanic? You've already taken this thread into ridiculous levels of silliness, so why not take it further?[/quote]

again, yes, in theory, he could know everything about mechanics there is to know, then he could pass on his knowledge - or he could get prosthetic arms fitted and probably do the job himself

how do u know that no-one would hire either of them, either the mechanic/mute radio person if they can do the job as good anyone else then its illegal to not give them the job because of their disability, its not silliness - its fact[/quote]

:lol:

You're really not getting the point of these hypothetical questions, are you?[/quote]
yep, i believe i am[/quote]

Trust me, you're not. You're editing the conditions as you know I'm right and can't force yourself to say "no, I wouldn't hire a no-armed mechanic". Hypothetical questions can't be fucking edited by a third-party. You need to answer them as they are as they aren't real situations.[/quote]

i saw a one armed person fix a car, remember, that was real

Darlo_Rob
Posts: 617
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 8:23 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by Darlo_Rob » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:01 pm

Quakerz wrote:
Darlo_Rob wrote:Eh? Further my agenda, what agenda? I'm highlighting what some posters typed in the match thread and I asked for an apology in the first post of this thread. If that wasn't forthcoming then I suggested a ban.

You trying to justify your actions is spineless.
Spineless?

Take a step away from the constant "he must be banned", "he's a bully/outrage/scumbag" rhetoric first of all because you are doing exactly what you are accusing me of...

Then, once you do that, explain to me how sticking to my guns and refusing to cave in to you is "spineless"?

In no way am I abusing you. I've made a reasoned argument to some posts on another thread. You've tried to justify your actions, I don't believe you.

Thanks.

User avatar
mikkyx
Site Admin
Posts: 3741
Joined: Sun Jul 05, 2009 5:52 pm

Re: Disgusted

Post by mikkyx » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:02 pm

darloviper wrote:I tell you what next home game lets have a blind person doing the commentary on the game eh?
I think he'll be too busy refereeing, in all honesty.
Darlo Uncovered flux capacitor maintainer-in-chief
Darlo Fans Radio | Official Website

User avatar
DarloOnTheUp
Posts: 6337
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:35 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by DarloOnTheUp » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:02 pm

hodgie1 wrote:
i saw a one armed person fix a car, remember, that was real
Have you ever seen a no-armed person fix a car? No, so STFU.

Excuse me, I need to go bang my head against the wall repeatedly.

hodgie1
Posts: 1652
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Disgusted

Post by hodgie1 » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:03 pm

darloviper wrote:I tell you what next home game lets have a blind person doing the commentary on the game eh?
nah, that wouldnt work, lol

darloviper
Posts: 172
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:30 pm
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Durham

Re: Disgusted

Post by darloviper » Sat Sep 10, 2011 8:06 pm

hodgie1 wrote:
darloviper wrote:I tell you what next home game lets have a blind person doing the commentary on the game eh?
nah, that wouldnt work, lol

precisely lol, what a stupid thread this has turned into

Locked