Interesting and Humour - page 4106
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
It seems to me that this is very dangerous. After all, if there is a group that discusses Russian history and politics from the perspective of, "We're doing all or almost all right, and we'll fix what's wrong with time," then the opponents of the opposition will demand their own group as well. And one can hardly find a reason to refuse. And if there is such a group, there will be so much dirt and lies that the entire forum will drown.
Sometimes I really want to engage in a discussion with that kind of oppositionists, but what keeps me from realizing that the answer will be copied from some trash can in social networks, while as a rule, they do not have a personal opinion and cannot analyze what they read. As a rule, they question everything good that is said about Russia, but blindly believe all the lies about Russia.
By the way, I know a couple of forums that at one time wanted to make a group and it didn't work out. Because people didn't want to go into the "basement" so to speak and make posts/developments etc just "for their own people".
So for the forum, publicity remains as it is now. But if so, then one should follow the rules of the branch, and if one does not like a branch or opponents, then open a branch where they will not be (the topic starter creates rules for a branch).
However, there are restrictions on off-topic threads ....
--------------
There's another point - do not respond to throw-ins.
Since -
For some people, what is a serious topic for us is just for "having a laugh" (different people have different priorities in life).
Sometimes I really want to engage in a discussion with the oppositionists, but I am held back by the understanding that the answer will be copied from some trash can in the social networks, and as a rule, they do not have a personal opinion and cannot analyze what they read. As a rule, they question everything good that is said about Russia, but blindly believe all the lies about Russia.
Have you been insulted? Nobody touched you, but in this case you came and called people with your own point of view, which they are able to justify and substantiate, and smeared them with mud.
Stating that they have no opinion of their own and are copying something. Your narrative is false, you might as well change the word oppositionists to pseudo-patriots, all the aspects you said would apply exactly the same to them, and even better.
They come in and troll brazenly, and tell you that they fart with flowers. Shit. Have some conscience, the man is already in a sauna, he cannot respond. Or you have an indulgence for the truth.
Have you been insulted? Nobody touched you, but in this case you came and called people with your own point of view, which they are able to justify and substantiate, and smeared them with mud.
Stating that they have no opinion of their own and are copying something. Your narrative is false, you might as well change the word oppositionists to pseudo-patriots, all the aspects you said would apply exactly the same to them, and even better.
Come and troll brazenly, and tell them that they fart with flowers. Shit. Have some conscience, the man is already in a sauna, he cannot respond. Or you have an indulgence for the truth.
Pay attention to the emphasis in my words.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and trading strategies testing
Interesting and Humorous
Alexey Viktorov, 2017.10.15 09:00
I think it is very dangerous. After all, if there is a group where they discuss Russian history and politics from the point of view of, "We have everything or almost everything good, and what is bad we will fix in time", then the opponents of the opposition will demand such a group of their own. And one can hardly find a reason to refuse. And if there is such a group, there will be so much mud and lies in that thread that the entire forum will drown.
Sometimes I really want to engage in a discussion with such oppositionists, but I am held back by the understanding that the answer will be copied from some trash in the social networks, and as a rule, they do not have a personal opinion and can not analyze what they read. As a rule, they question everything good that is said about Russia, but blindly believe all the lies about Russia.
Highlighted means that not all and not always. But unfortunately very often.
Also, pay attention to whom the dialogue was started with. Is Sergei Golubev in the bathhouse? Were my words addressed to Dmitry??? indulgence....
Pay attention to the highlighted in my words.
Highlighted means not all and not always. But unfortunately very often.
And note with whom the dialogue was initiated. Is Sergei Golubev in the bathhouse? Were my words addressed to Dmitry??? indulgence....
If I had written that as a rule the other side are zombified people who are unable to understand the reality of the situation, they would have raised a hue and cry. Trust me.
And do not try to excuse yourself about it very often and highlight one side. I personally have not noticed that very often lies and other niceties have taken place, all the more so from many, the same way others have copied.
Exactly the same way you can say that the other side"blindly believe all the nonsense about the state of affairs in Russia. And the other side also puts up some things that are stupid, well there are some things, but these things do not show the real picture. The same way the "opposition" shows the facts that do not look good compared with claims that all is well.
What lies did you see.
PS. Sergei Golubev is not a party to the controversy. And you are busy discussing a group of people with another person, as if this group is not here. Especially by bringing up topics that you were banned from raising on the last page. Accordingly, I responded as well, since that's the way it is. At the same time, the spreader of filth and lies, you for some reason are not in a hurry to call yourself.If I had written that as a rule the other side are zombified people incapable of understanding the real state of affairs, they would have raised a hue and cry. Believe me.
And don't make excuses for very often singling out one side. I personally have not noticed that very often lies and other niceties have taken place, all the more so from many people who have copied the rest.
Exactly the same way you can say that the other side"blindly believe all the nonsense about the state of affairs in Russia. And the other side also puts up some things that are stupid, well there are some things, but these things do not show the real picture. The same way the "opposition" shows the facts that do not look good compared with claims that all is well.
What lies have you seen.
PS. Sergei Golubev is not a party to controversy. And you are busy discussing a group of people with another person, as if this group is not here. All the more so raising topics that you were banned from raising on the last page. Accordingly, I responded as well, since that's the way it is. At the same time you are a spreader of filth and lies, for some reason you are in no hurry to call yourself.I didn't see any dirt or lies in his neutral statements.
And there are plenty of idiots on both sides. If we start putting up here all the collected absurdities and revelations about the current promoted leader of the youth-adolescent opposition, it won't do any good. No one. And we'll all be in the bathhouse together. This is not a political forum. Please keep to the rules. I (maybe I am biased, of course) have not yet noticed the dirt and filth from those who are not in the opposition. But from those who position themselves as such - all the time. It all started with Mishek. The followers immediately appeared. Just read/see the posts/pictures/demotivators (for clip-comic-minded schoolchildren), and be horrified at how much rubbish, lies and filth there is.
It all started with Mishek.
And when I started banning him, they got worried, turned on me and demoted me as a moderator.
Didn't want to see the root of the problem, though.
Eventually they had to.
At least that's the way it is.
They didn't want to see the root of the problem, though.
You just didn't see right through it. I guess at that stage Mishek was playing his part. When he played it and didn't realise he'd played it, he was eliminated.
You have to decide whether something did or did not happen, and then do one thing or the other - either assert or assume.
However, it's neither interesting nor humorous. Fuck it.
You just didn't see right through it. It seems that at that stage Mishek was playing his part. When he played it back and didn't realise he had played it, he was eliminated.