The title is a question put out by DD for discussion.The thread title refers to a newspaper article in which Eamon Ryan discusses the interaction between the Permanent Government and the elected Ministers.
So? You agree with me on some too (in case you've forgotten) and disagree.Disillusioned democrat is a respected poster who has contributed a lot to the site over the years. We disagree on some topics, and we agree on other topics.
So - you debated with me on the Varadkar thread. issues, policy and options. Is the difference in attitude here (your incessant name calling and insults) because I'm outing the Green Party, and the truth is hitting home?Most importantly, we debate the issues. We debate the policy. We debate the options.
Good for you and herEven Dresden8 is able to put across a reasonable argument, even if her language is flowery, and even if I normally take a different perspective.
As distinct from you then?You should pay attention to how these contributors construct logical arguments.
Funny how you can have memory lapses. You had a pretty good one on the Varadkar thread denying that I'd told you my voting preferences. You were called out there too.I don't recall you doing that. Can you quote it again please.
I wrote that I'd given my opinion on the deluded part of this thread title. But then again you knew that, but tried the diversion.
Funny that. You haven't answered. I still await your answers. And your answers aren't in contained in a post that's years old.My recollection is that you resurrected a thread that had been dormant since 2015 and immediately launched into a nonsensical diatribe wherein you began by quoting my answer to a question from OceanTroll (post 311), and then later on you accused me of not answering questions (post 315)
In posts 320, 322, 324, 329, 339, 344, 350, 351, 354, 361 and 369, you again accused me of not answering the question, even though you had quoted my answer in your first contribution to the thread, post 311.
If you read through that, HBAB re-hashed what he meant to say later in that thread - you should read a little further sometimes before referring to something that actually makes you look foolish.(There was also that diversion around post 343 whenever you also got stuck into HBAP because he hadn't answered questions on another thread - even though he clearly had, and you accused Myers Mimnagh of the same crime in post 350, even though he regularly schools your sorry ass for that nonsense).
Now that you're putting yourself on the same level as Myers Mimnagh in the 'handing ass' competition, that confirms the level you're at. (He still hasn't listed one success that Varadkar has had since becoming Taoiseach by the way)
I must be learning from you - the master.Grade A trolling there.
Show us how it's done.
OceanTroll fairly well put you in your place on that one - telling you that you don't know who he/she is.OceanTroll has a long standing beef with the Green Party and is very bitter. His comments should be taken with a pinch of salt.
But seeing as you brought it up.
If it's not on the web, you can hardly refer to it as a Website now can you.Meanwhile, in the real world;
The original website was never deleted. It still exists on the back ups of the server it was hosted on in Norway.
How do you know that?In 2012 (and again in 2018) the Green Party built completely new websites.
The new sites are interactive brochure sites.
The committee(s) who commissioned the websites obviously felt that this was the way to best utilise the medium of a website.
But they're incorrect - right? On your say-so?OceanTroll and Sir Charles may indeed have a different opinion.
Again, OceanTroll put you in your place about that -telling you that you don't know who he/she is.But they are former members. They chose to leave. Their opinion of the decisions of the current members with regard to the website is of no consequence.
Post 142 + 143 says moving from one CMS to another can be tricky. Did I say otherwise? His post 145 - you can direct that more to yourself. So you've quoted JMCC's comments as some type of back up to your posts. is that it?[/QUOTE]My answers, particularly the one you quoted in your first contribution, are indeed revealing. JMCC's posts 142, 143 and 145 (among others) are also very revealing.
Ah, here we have it. I provided two links as examples of the deletion of historic information, and you are here still basically telling us that you haven't the ability to click the links and see the differences. That's called running away under the guise of an excuse. Are you telling me then that there are no differences in both - that there are no deletions of historic information? Are you saying that. A yes or no will suffice.You posted two links to the Wayback Machine. You did not post any summary of the content, or set out whatever it is about the content of those archives that you have a quibble with.
The argument is, as mentioned previously, that the Green Party, while in Government with FF, stood by and allowed the financial situation to further deteriorate, and the excuse for leaving was that FF couldn't get their leadership matters finalized - nothing to do with what you rant about here and on the Howlin thread, which was the financial situation. Further to that then, after being decimated in the following election, the Green Party sought to re-invent themselves and dumped from its live website the immediate previous history of their term in Government, as well as references to former membersYou fail to set out your argument, and that makes me a clown?
Oh yes.Seriously like?
So? It doesn't get away from the fact that it was done (dumping the history). It's not me that has the problem with it - it's the Green Party that has, as it is it that is hiding, hoping that no-one will remember.As I have pointed out before, the content of the website would have been decided by whichever Green Party members worked on commissioning the website. If you have a problem with the choices they made, please take it up with them. Whining about it on P.ie doesn't do anything to fix this problem you believe is of such importance.
What an infantile remark. Are you suggesting that the Leader of the Party had no input?Was Eamon Ryan on the committee that developed the content for the website?
I didn't know that.
2011 was called Rejection - that's why people are laughing at the Green Party.That's called projection.
It's why people laugh at you.