Good oh Stewgreen. Your very own fantasy thread, you can invite all your pals (Oh, you have!!) to bash and mock that which you despise. Are you sure the world needs yet another thread on the same theme - there are so many already in BH? I note that some of your "attractions" (but they don't really attract you do they? You need another name) seem to have been acquired from the CAGW theme park down the road and don't really fit into your establishment. You really do need more swings and roundabouts.

I'm sure you'll get lots of Daily Mail, and perhaps a few Daily Star, visitors.

Pity you've built the whole edifice on a cesspit.

Are you planning a troll zoo alongside? I might have applied, but I don't like the management - too hands on.

Oh goody a Don Quixote zone, tilting at wind turbines! Surely the wrong themepark? Try the Brexit park down the road, it would compliment the defence against the evil spanish fishing boat armarda game.

AK I might have missed where you made a positive contribution to this site - could you post a link for me so I can rule you out as just a trouble making git?

Tinyco2.
Gits are female and the last time I looked I'm not.
Positive enough for you? Informative?

I was not aware that contributions had to be positive.
That stricture might perhaps rule out 97% of everything here.

Have a nice day. Too positive?

If you're arguing the common meaning of 'git' then you're the very definition of one.

Tiny CO2. I was only being precise. I didn't believe you were referring to "we two" in Old English, and only a cad would use git in its slang pejorative sense. I do not take you for a cad. We have had numerous pleasant exchanges in the past, and only yesterday we were discussing Whigs and Tories.

Why the attack mode? I was only having a little gentle fun at Stewgreen's expense for his penchant for creating yet another anti-BBC thread.. Strewth, Stewverde has had much fun at my expense. Why did you feel you had to support him? He's quite capable of defending himself (see 9.48am) as I know to my cost.

It just comes across as bossy/bitchy. Like you’re telling us what we can or can’t discuss. One of the many reasons I dislike the BBC and the EU is that they think their opinions should override everyone else’s. Perhaps you're too used to right wingers backing down to keep the peace? The Left seems to take those who vote Tory as an offense. Why do you think there are shy Tories? Why do you think the BBC finds it hard to attract Conservative voters for the Question Time audience?

You like the BBC and you want to stay in the EU. We get it. By all means make a positive defence of them, but stop telling us we shouldn’t make negative ones.

Even your comment that triggered the art = left debate was a challenge. "Why is it that almost anything to do with the arts is automatically considered part of the left at BH?" I note that you didn't conclude we were right, even when you asked where the right wing artists are.

Tiny CO2. Surely you know me by now? Bitchy/bossy moi?; hardly, sometimes I'm hanging on for dear life when several/many of you gang up..

Most people posting at BH seem to be right wing, anti EU, anti BBC, anti Guardian, pro Trump. I get it. Why do you all go on so much about it? I guess its because you get pleasure in doing so. (And why not?). But does this preclude others from contributing, those with a different outlook? Can't I have fun by poking fun or can only those with "correct" opinions be allowed?

You (and some others) seem to assume that when I comment on what someone has written (like the implication commonly expressed in BH that all art is left wing) this is seen (by you) as a challenge (to you, to everyone at BH?). Why should this be? Are you perhaps intolerant of any criticism, any opposition? The specific section where we discussed Whigs and Tories, arose following golf Charlie's comment that left wing art is gloomier. Something like that stimulates me to question it. A small amount of Wiki research revealed that it is extraordinarily difficult to establish the political leanings of artists. I am fully aware that many (most) current artists are left leaning and often luvvies or celebs (and so dutifully hated in BH). My contention was, and still is, that not everyone in the Arts is a leftwinger, so I refute your claim that I should have admitted I was wrong. It is you that have not proved me wrong.

I might irritate, but I do not insist that I am right in any dispute (except in some matters geological). Yet you make the ridiculous claim that I have added nothing positive. It was not long ago that someone commented that without EM and myself, this site would have little to say in Bish's absence.

Show me, in this thread, where I exalted contributors to BH not to make negative comments about the BBC as you claim I have done. You certainly have plenty of venues to indulge yourselves - or is this too much like telling you what you can or cannot do? Certainly you are not shy in telling me what I should and should not do.

Is calling someone a git being bitchy/bossy?

No I'm being rude, deliberately so in the hope it dents your smug shield. The way you write is aggressive. You get the responses you ask for, and then squeal people are ganging up on you. If you want people to treat you nicely, stop provoking them. That they write about the left, the EU, the BBC or even universities is not aimed at you so stop acting like it is. If you can't help making snide comments, don't read stuff you know you'll dislike.

"My contention was, and still is, that not everyone in the Arts is a left-winger". Nobody said they were, just a lot of them. As demonstrated by Stewgreen's link. Especially a lot of those wittering about climate change. The things go hand in hand. I'm sorry if that embarrasses you as a left wing supporter. Perhaps you could work out why they attract each other. Personally I think it's because they like telling others what to do...

Incidentally, if you feel that we gang up against you, imagine how we feel having to put up with the BBC every day. They spout stuff that bores, irritates or enrages all the time. And we have to pay for it.

Tiny CO2. This conversation ends. You are being deliberately provocative. I tried being nice, but you are being obtuse. I wish I could offend, but as I was instructed here long ago, you cannot offend, you can only be offended.

Perhaps you could be positive about this thread, you havent so far. More intent on abusing me. This thread so far would have died the death if it were not for your little contratempt.

Carry on, enjoy.

Have a nice day

" I tried being nice" no you didn't, you were being nasty and don't like being called on it. "This thread so far would have died the death if it were not for your little contratempt." No, it would probably have died a death if you hadn't chosen to take a swipe at stewgreen. Perhaps you will think twice next time before you drop one of your little friendly comments.

Parting shots
1) the idea that the BBC gangs up on you is paranoia almost beyond belief
2) You don't have to pay for the BBC, you don't have to listen nor watch it.
3) The BBC clearly offends you (but surely you can only take offence?). There is a simple remedy (2).

Multiple pleasantnesses.

Nah, I'd prefer to demand the BBC be scrapped for being a left wing waste of money.

#9 the park has a theatre where you get mugged on the way in. They then spend an hour insulting you. When you complain they say you can leave any time you like but they'll send the heavy gang round to beat you up for more money if they catch you having any kind of fun, even if you've left the park altogether.

Re: dropping a friendly little comment department
Look back at 10.57am.
Pot black anyone?

Tit for tat mate.

Why would anyone ever voluntarily pay money to go into unattraction 9 when they don't have to?
Seems like there must be some hidden attractions within that those with patience can find and appreciate.
Perhaps unattraction 9 is being misrepresented by those who would wish it closed down.

Or maybe people don't like to be harassed by BBC goons all the time. For a while I was in charge of an empty property and the BBC license demands were endless. I know people who only watch videos and they get visited every 6 months, even though they've demonstrated their TV doesn't even receive digital and the one before that had no aerial equipment. Just because I don't like the BBC doesn't mean I don't want to watch other channels and since I'm paying already, I'll even watch what I can from the BBC - eg that Dan Cruickshank programme At Home With The British. It doesn't mean I'm getting my money's worth or wouldn't happily wave it good bye.

Tiny CO2.
But you titted mate, not I. You jumped in all protective like in defence of poor ol' Booyahverde who was being so severely mocked by myself. I don't think your name was ever mentioned before you parachuted. Certainly I had no desire to offend you (damn there's that word again).

I don't ever recall you coming to my aid when being ever so gently chided by Goulashgrun, but then as a BBC-loving, Guardian-reading, near Trotskyist I am considered fair game.

Yes I was being slighty nasty to Gumbogrene, but then (as you so charmingly put it): tit for tat.

Smug enough for you?

Salutations, of the nicest kind.