For help, advice and discussion about stuff not related to aviation. Play nice: no religion, no politics and no axe grinding please.
By chevvron
#1844267
So poor mollycoddled overpaid footballers are 'scared' by racist comments on social media by people they're never ever likely to meet in person.
They could do as I do: don't have your phone switched on 24/7, don't use a smartphone, don't subscribe to these forums for morons.
Or they could turn the other cheek.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1844274
I don’t think they are scared, they are rightly extremely angry and frustrated that obnoxious people appear to have free rein on many of these platforms.

NHS staff and others who have been attacked in similar ways are also joining the boycott.
Last edited by johnm on Sun May 02, 2021 7:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Flyin'Dutch', MachFlyer, kanga and 3 others liked this
User avatar
By Rob L
#1844280
chevvron wrote:So poor mollycoddled overpaid footballers are 'scared' ....


They should stop playing football and become model citizens instead of over-paid idiots :roll: ; that might help for a start.

Football supporters should stop paying their salaries; that would help too :thumleft:
AndyR and 1 others liked this
By Fellsteruk
#1844285
I’ll be honest I don’t like football and think they are all overpaid and a lot arrogant so in so’s

But nobody, no matter who they are or what they did,do or look like or don’t look like should be subject to the carp I’ve seen reported in the media.

Social media has the power to be an amazing tool for the great but sadly keyboard warrior bigots abuse it to abuse fellow humans and it’s not fair and it’s not right.

The boycot feels no more than a PR thing because let’s face it, this bigots won’t change who they are or how they act and frankly a couple hundred million lost ad revenue “if that” is nothing to these platforms.

The platforms need to take responsibility and stop using the excuse of “we’re not content providers” to not police and moderate. They should be tighter checks to ensure nobody under the age of consent is on the platform “sadly some kids are the worse” and a zero tolerance policy not only when reported but with teams of moderators using AI to find such content much quicker and taking action.

No matter who you are even if you have a stick up your **** and paid stupid amounts of money you don’t deserve to be bullied.

I’m no snowflake but these small minorities need to be stopped.
Flyin'Dutch', johnm, Morten and 6 others liked this
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1844294
Flyin'Dutch' wrote:...validated by the current climate of populistic leadership in a number of countries.

There is nowhere more prevalent for abuse than within their own ranks. It seems a common occurrence in the stands. But then it is also prevalent within their very own types.

Or here

If ever there was a need to first of all focus on getting their own house in order. :wink:

It's not acceptable by any measure, but inevitable. They want to dish it out and reap the benefits of social media, but not deal with the darker side.
By johnm
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1844298
Miscellaneous wrote:Agreed, but that is not a few footballers spitting their dummies out for a few days.


It’s a start and as I said earlier they are not alone NHS staff have followed suit amongst others
User avatar
By skydriller
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1844302
Fellsteruk wrote:The platforms need to take responsibility and stop using the excuse of “we’re not content providers” to not police and moderate. They should be tighter checks to ensure nobody under the age of consent is on the platform “sadly some kids are the worse” and a zero tolerance policy not only when reported but with teams of moderators using AI to find such content much quicker and taking action.


Actually Im in two, or even three, minds about this.

There is absolutely no obligation for anyone to use social media. It is kinda like going to a pub and getting into a discussion about something - you dont have to go to the pub, you can walk out if you dont like the decor or people there. If you want to be there for the conversation you can choose to argue or be controversial, or not. And you can always walk out if you dont like the reaction you get.

On the other hand, you absolutely have the right to not be verbally abused and insulted for no reason, either on social media or down the pub when all you want is a quiet drink, and those being abusive need to be taken to task. Which leads to the question of if it is the owner of the establishment (landlord, Mark Zuckerberg etc) or the police that should be dealing with this.

And the thing is, do you really want individuals deciding what can be said and what cant be said, be that the landlord in the pub or the guy running twitter? What about if your views dont agree with those of the establishment you are using? Recently we've had Donald Trump banned from Twitter and Kier Starmer thrown out of a Pub. Fair enough? What about if an establishment is owned by someone who themselves has controversial views - what happens if that person doesnt like a political view or football team, even a nationality or a step further, a race? Does a landlord get sanctioned if two custoners get into a fight? Should a social media platform?
flybymike, eltonioni liked this
User avatar
By Miscellaneous
#1844305
Mike Tango wrote:...the point of the boycott seems to be being fundamentally missed by one or two here :roll:

Or maybe the sacrifice of a few days from social media is seen by others for what it is.
By Fellsteruk
#1844306
Delete ya social accounts, did a few years back and I never looked back.

I did rejoin insta but that was only to snoop on other pilots/flying shizz and chart my own ppl progress.

Not everyone is bad on so I’ll but it a treadmill you’re better off :)
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1844307
skydriller wrote:There is absolutely no obligation for anyone to use social media. It is kinda like going to a pub and getting into a discussion about something - you dont have to go to the pub, you can walk out if you dont like the decor or people there. If you want to be there for the conversation you can choose to argue or be controversial, or not. And you can always walk out if you dont like the reaction you get.

On the other hand, you absolutely have the right to not be verbally abused and insulted for no reason, either on social media or down the pub when all you want is a quiet drink, and those being abusive need to be taken to task. Which leads to the question of if it is the owner of the establishment (landlord, Mark Zuckerberg etc) or the police that should be dealing with this.



In a civilised society it is accepted that people are not discriminated against the 7 protected characteristics:

Image

That has nothing to do with wokeness or personal preference or getting their own house in order - it's the law (and common decency)
johnm, leiafee, avtur3 and 3 others liked this