Dailew

[Professor]

Has called me a racist. By Kerouac's logic he/she/they should be banned

 

[dailew]

Has called me a racist. By Kerouac's logic he/she/they should be banned

It's OK to call someone a racist if they are one.


You accuse me of racism several times then the first time I reply in kind you play the victim.
Even start a thread about it. Sad.

Kerouac pointed out that this is what happens with your sort. How right he was.

 

[Eddy the Beagle]

Been reading this forum (some good threads on here) and in particular the most popular (nip in the bud).

What dailew failed to point out was, that the sentence with the error (which the Professor very reluctantly admitted to) actually had two errors (if you use his latest definition of "vast majority" - 10% or more than the next group ).

"Remember there is nowhere in the UK other than London where white British are not the vast majority of the population."

According to his latest definition London does have a vast majority of white British. 45% which is at least 25% more than the next group.


But it is obvious what the esteemed Professor has done.

He originally had in mind a definition of vast majority that was in line with what most people had ie (60%-90%) of the total.

Then, when several more examples of towns or cities where there wasn't a vast majority were produced he tried to change his definition so as not to make his original statement appear even more ludicrous.

There is further evidence of this in the thread if you look closely.

So either just that one sentence, which was at the heart of his argument, had two errors, or it had just one error and he later lied about what he actually thought "vast majority" was.

Neither is a good look for a Professor.

 

[Pegojack]

Been reading this forum (some good threads on here) and in particular the most popular (nip in the bud).

What dailew failed to point out was, that the sentence with the error (which the Professor very reluctantly admitted to) actually had two errors (if you use his latest definition of "vast majority" - 10% or more than the next group ).

"Remember there is nowhere in the UK other than London where white British are not the vast majority of the population."

According to his latest definition London does have a vast majority of white British. 45% which is at least 25% more than the next group.


But it is obvious what the esteemed Professor has done.

He originally had in mind a definition of vast majority that was in line with what most people had ie (60%-90%) of the total.

Then, when several more examples of towns or cities where there wasn't a vast majority were produced he tried to change his definition so as not to make his original statement appear even more ludicrous.

There is further evidence of this in the thread if you look closely.

So either just that one sentence, which was at the heart of his argument, had two errors, or it had just one error and he later lied about what he actually thought "vast majority" was.

Neither is a good look for a Professor.

I told you, Prof - it only encourages them......

 

[Neath_Jack]

Been reading this forum (some good threads on here) and in particular the most popular (nip in the bud).

What dailew failed to point out was, that the sentence with the error (which the Professor very reluctantly admitted to) actually had two errors (if you use his latest definition of "vast majority" - 10% or more than the next group ).

"Remember there is nowhere in the UK other than London where white British are not the vast majority of the population."

According to his latest definition London does have a vast majority of white British. 45% which is at least 25% more than the next group.


But it is obvious what the esteemed Professor has done.

He originally had in mind a definition of vast majority that was in line with what most people had ie (60%-90%) of the total.

Then, when several more examples of towns or cities where there wasn't a vast majority were produced he tried to change his definition so as not to make his original statement appear even more ludicrous.

There is further evidence of this in the thread if you look closely.

So either just that one sentence, which was at the heart of his argument, had two errors, or it had just one error and he later lied about what he actually thought "vast majority" was.

Neither is a good look for a Professor.

Hello Chad, what took you so long?

 

[Best_loser]

Been reading this forum (some good threads on here) and in particular the most popular (nip in the bud).

What dailew failed to point out was, that the sentence with the error (which the Professor very reluctantly admitted to) actually had two errors (if you use his latest definition of "vast majority" - 10% or more than the next group ).

"Remember there is nowhere in the UK other than London where white British are not the vast majority of the population."

According to his latest definition London does have a vast majority of white British. 45% which is at least 25% more than the next group.


But it is obvious what the esteemed Professor has done.

He originally had in mind a definition of vast majority that was in line with what most people had ie (60%-90%) of the total.

Then, when several more examples of towns or cities where there wasn't a vast majority were produced he tried to change his definition so as not to make his original statement appear even more ludicrous.

There is further evidence of this in the thread if you look closely.

So either just that one sentence, which was at the heart of his argument, had two errors, or it had just one error and he later lied about what he actually thought "vast majority" was.

Neither is a good look for a Professor.

I told you, Prof - it only encourages them......

Eddy sounds just like dailew

Joined today

 

[dickythorpe]

If only there was a down arrow function on this board......

 

[Best_loser]

If only there was a down arrow function on this board......

As pego said, you have to ignore him\ them

There is a reason those two threads were locked up

People can read them and come to their own conclusions what was going on there

 

[ABSwan]

Why start a thread like this?

 

[Sa2 jack]

Kerouac was an inspirational writer.

What's this poster like.?

 

[Eddy the Beagle]

So no defense from the professor.

The logic is sound and he is stymied. He is in zugzwang.

So his original statement

Remember there is nowhere in the UK other than London where white British are not the vast majority of the population.

only contains one bit of "misinformation" but he later lied to try and lighten the extent to which how way off the mark he was.

And here is the further evidence I alluded to.


When asked for a definition of "vast majority" he jokingly said "2% surely!".

An obvious reference to Brexit, which was alluded to in the next post and he never denied.

i.e 50% + 2%

When pressed for a serious answer he said "Anything upward of 10%". ie 50% + 10% = 60%.

Then when more examples were produced where the percentage was under 60% he tried to pretend what he actually meant was 10% more than the next group !!!

ie Sandwell's 50% consituted a majority !!


That's misinformation and a lie.

From the very same poster who pompously declared his righteous anger at seeing "lies and misinformation".

 

[Ebo]

Has called me a racist. By Kerouac's logic he/she/they should be banned

Talking of Kerouac, I don’t think he’ll be on here any time soon (well not that I know of) he’s having too much fun on the old board. There seems to be a group over there who refuse to come over here.

 

[Sa2 jack]

Yep,personal scraps aren't the way forward.
It's been a tough season and ended in failure -and it was just that.

 

[LeonWasTheDog's]

Kerouac was an inspirational copy and paster.

What's this poster like.?

^^corrected that for you :lol:

 

[Sa2 jack]

Kerouac was an inspirational copy and paster.

What's this poster like.?

^^corrected that for you :lol:

It's a play on words though innit