And they’re off..
The Irish Times confirms the speculation – “The Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, has set Thursday May 24th as the date for the general election.”
He went to Áras an Uachtaráin this morning to seek the dissolution of the 29th dail from the President Mary McAleese. The President then left the Aras for a week-long trip to the US.
Adds Before leaving, President Mary McAleese had just enough time to update the official website.
well peteb I’ve bookmarked this thread, for future HTML linking if necessary!
I did mention the ontopic sunday tribune, perhaps missed by you!
I will do that susan and let chris know straight away. As to defensiveness on the part of commentators, perhaps suitable guidelines like the one I’ve drawn up for thread authors could be drawn up for commentators; but I’m tired now.
and now back on topic
“but I’m tired now..”
‘Course you are, parci.. ‘course you are..
Btw.. that would be a commenting policy you had in mind?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qi2h_WCYBA
going the extra mile
the commenting policy doesn’t cover how to, it covers how not to. So its a rule, I did say mine was a guideline to better blogging.
They might even be worth refining and offering as a blog in itself on Sluggers.
reading the comments policy, I found no reference to the title’s construction, just the responses; if you want to get technical on the devil in the detail.
“A Different Kind Of Muppet.”
lollol, Soupy.
“So its a rule, I did say mine was a guideline to better blogging.”
And once again..
As previously mentioned..
I’ll take your advice under.. ermm.. advisement.
ok cool pete I just looked up advisement, and it had a different meaning to what I’d thought.
Full moon wednesday 10.00 am, but that’d be another more esoteric set of astrological guidelines to be aware of; if one is feeling conflicted, and doesn’t know why.
No need to over-egg the pudding
This really is g/nite
I thought I sensed my ears burning
Thanks for the kind words Susan
In relation to Parcifal’s suggestion for some type of blogger checklist, I think not.
On my blog I decide what I write about, I decide the tone, I decide if I wish to shit-stir etc
In that sense it’s up to Pete how he writes his threads
In short
It’s a non-runner parcifal
macswiney, “…just a few days another blogger (Marcellinus) responded to one of my posts by referring to me as “Sinn Fein Shiteâ€â€¦â€
Wrong. As I pointed out to you on that thread, I used the term “Shinner shite†to refer to what was being said (i.e. the shite of the Shinner)and not to who was saying it. May be it is you who can not tell the difference? Yet more evidence, (as if any were needed!) of the Shinner arrogance that wrongly presumes that everyone thinks and acts like they do. For anybody who is interested, here’s the link.
Susan, if you can provide a link to CG’s thread on Martin Ferris, I will have a look at it though I fail to see what relevance it could have, regardless of what he says.
My concern about the Alex Attwood thread centered on the fact that it was based on “unconfirmed reportsâ€; in short nothing more than “gossipâ€. It was not about Alex Attwood, Martin Ferris or anybody else for that matter. Now those “unconfirmed reports†may have turned out to be true but equally, like all “gossipâ€, they may have turned out to be wrong. What resulted was simply another thread that afforded Shinner sycophants the opportunity to do bit of SDLP bashing. As humourous as that may have been for them, this type of thread only trivialises and demeans the bigger issues; in this case it was the very important issue of road safety.
parcifal is right to raise this issue. The standard of the threads is important if this site is to maintain it’s integrity. If we are to have threads based solely on gossip, rumour and hearsay, the standard of blogging will only be diminished. It seems that the Slug is becoming a cold house for SDLP supporters and anybody else who doesn’t support the Dupper/Shinner combo’. May be Mick is happy with that because, after all, it’s his blog.
>On my blog I decide what I write about, I decide
>the tone, I decide if I wish to shit-stir etc
>In that sense it’s up to Pete how he writes his
>threads
Quite right, and the responses you get will be shaped by what you post. You want to stir shit, shit is what you’ll get. Long discussions about the poster and not about the topic. You’re within your rights of course.
For myself, Fair Deal is the example of a ‘biased’ blogger who manages to stir up debate on the topic rather than himself (except when the topic is himself), mostly (and certainly recently).
Mmmm, that’s an inelegant sentence. I hope you know what I mean…
Guys, it’s the Internet, not the Oxford Debating Society. I think you’re all taking things a bit too seriously.
no complaints chris, you’re entirely open about what you believe and where you’re coming from.
However due to Slugger’s uniqeness, one would have thought that a successful thread is one where the commentators get stuck into a good debate; so the guidelines would help frame that desirable outcome.
satisfaction levels can’t be that high if too much criticism is direced towards the author; when just a wee bit more self reflection avoids that clash. More light, less heat surely ?
“However due to Slugger’s uniqeness, one would have thought that a successful thread is one where the commentators get stuck into a good debate”
Instead of whining for 50+ posts about the fact that the thread was started at 11am instead of the very second the election was anounced.
DK
I admit it was an extended whinge, but there was some light at the end of the tunnel, and mercifully it wasn’t a freight train
I think Pete Baker posts excellent threads, they are put up intelligently and he is one of the most unbiased bloggers on slugger. I would say Fair Deal is biased toward a certain view but not Pete Baker. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t post his views only that I find him quite objective most times in all he posts. Granted this one was a little late, but thats not usual for him, and he does take an awful lot of stick but weathers it charmingly in my opinion.
Forlorn Fairy – you aren’t Pete’s mum by any chance? :O)
lol no marty, only speaking as I find.
My focus has been and will remain on the uneven application of the man not ball rule. I can get a yellow for addressing Pete as a sad git, albeit conditionally, and over on another thread people who are walking among us can be accused of being murderers, adulterers and touts. Whereas guilt on the first issue is matter for a court, guilt on the issue of ‘touting’ can lead to mob justice and a violent end.
That’s why I think the man not ball rule should be evenly and consistently applied.
The thread to which I’m referring is the Another Informer Re Revealed thread first posted on 22 April.