Random Arsenal Shit (When it's not worth starting a thread)

[KSE Comedy Club]

You're shitting me!


I think it's valid to ask someone why they voted a certain way.
I also think it's valid to judge someone based on that reason

What's the point when usually the person asking the question will instantly disagree with the answer no matter what it is?

[KSE Comedy Club]

I don’t think it’s even valid to ask someone how they voted in the first place, if they volunteer the information fine but otherwise mind your fucking business.

People who voted Remain or voted Leave, you can tell with many of them it’s less about understanding the issue than about trying to communicate a certain cultural vibe. I find that people no matter what side they are on, who judge other people on how they vote are a) not particularly very bright, you don’t have to agree with something in order to understand it b) you wonder how actually wedded to democracy they are when they think there’s a correct and incorrect option to vote for.


If the bloke had gone on about voting leave and had put the woman on the spot about why she voted Remain, he’d have been the prick in my view. And that’s why I decided not to give her a taste of her own medicine

Ultimately I find I have more respect for people who told me (volunteered the information, rather than me asking them) that they didn’t feel they knew enough to make such a decision. Far wiser to admit what you don’t know than to pretend you know, act superior because you think you’re one of the smart people and thumb your nose at others

I didn't vote as I was not sure myself.

Whilst I understood and liked the idea of leaving the EU, I was never entirely sure anyone in our government would have the ability and competency to actually implement it properly - seems like I was right on the money.

[Letters]

You can ask someone what colour underwear they are wearing, but it’s kind of bad form. I see it the same with asking people how they voted, unless you’re conducting a survey for an exit poll.

It's about the context of the conversation. I don't think it's an inherently rude thing to ask but doing so out of the blue would be a bit weird.
A bit like the whole "where are you really from" thing. Certain "right on" people seem to think that's inherently rude. I disagree. Well, maybe if you ask it like that it is.
But in the context of getting to know someone asking about someone's origin - especially if you detect an accent - is pretty reasonable.

I don't regard any of this as "deeply personal" and there is no "power imbalance" in the context of two people getting to know each other.
But if people decline to answer then that's their prerogative. Secret ballot and all that.

Politics has always been more tribal than policy based anyway.

Still very true in the US, I think it's less so here than it used to be. I have voted different ways over time, I don't see myself as deeply affiliated with any party.
Probably closest to the Lib Dems but till we have a more proportional system (i.e. never) there's no point in voting for them round my way.

[KSE Comedy Club]

What puts the article in perspective is that Le Grove is a big Arteta cheerleader so on the surface at least for him to be concerned about this appointment because of the power it gives Arteta is certainly interesting.

However it’s not like he’s ever been uncritical of Arteta, he clearly feels that Arteta does not seem to deal well with Load management. But equally I think he’s also concerned about replicating a situation that we were in in Wenger’s last ten years which was essentially a power grab and that KSE are ok with this happening again because it means they can take a more hands off approach (which makes sense when you consider that to them Arsenal is a financial asset rather than a sporting project).

As for the evidence for these fears, I simply don’t know….i don’t know the type of working relationship he had with Diego Simeone at Atletico, I don’t know the reason why Berta left the club. I also don’t know whether Le Grove has hard evidence that other prospective candidates turned down Arsenal because of the setup they were being asked to work under (but equally it wouldn’t surprise me given what went before under Wenger)

Yes some of the comments below the article have questioned the same thing - he is being somewhat contradictive based on his opinion of Arteta.

I agree that no manager should be too powerful, like Wenger was back in the day. It had it's plus points of course, but the negatives far outweigh those.
I'm just not sure the approach of being concerned with this appointment is a valid one.

[Letters]

What's the point when usually the person asking the question will instantly disagree with the answer no matter what it is?

I don't think that's necessarily the case. There are reasons for voting a certain way which are more valid than others.

[HCZ_Reborn]

Yes some of the comments below the article have questioned the same thing - he is being somewhat contradictive based on his opinion of Arteta.

I agree that no manager should be too powerful, like Wenger was back in the day. It had it's plus points of course, but the negatives far outweigh those.
I'm just not sure the approach of being concerned with this appointment is a valid one.

True, my concern with Berta is that Joao Felix was signed under his stewardship.

Overall it would be interesting to see at signings from the Portuguese league into the premier league over the past two decades to see how they’ve worked out. A mixed bag at best….Chelsea did ok with the players Mourinho signed from Porto but these were his players that he won the champions league with.

I’d be interested to know if Amorim showed any interest in signing Gyokeres and if not, would it simply be a case of budgetary restraints

[KSE Comedy Club]

I don't think that's necessarily the case. There are reasons for voting a certain way which are more valid than others.

People vote the way they do because of their thoughts & opinion's on the subject matter which corresponds to it.
In no way is a vote ever more valid one way over the other.

That would suggest there is a 'right or wrong' vote - which is a dictatorship.

[HCZ_Reborn]

It's about the context of the conversation. I don't think it's an inherently rude thing to ask but doing so out of the blue would be a bit weird.
A bit like the whole "where are you really from" thing. Certain "right on" people seem to think that's inherently rude. I disagree. Well, maybe if you ask it like that it is.
But in the context of getting to know someone asking about someone's origin - especially if you detect an accent - is pretty reasonable.

I don't regard any of this as "deeply personal" and there is no "power imbalance" in the context of two people getting to know each other.
But if people decline to answer then that's their prerogative. Secret ballot and all that.


Still very true in the US, I think it's less so here than it used to be. I have voted different ways over time, I don't see myself as deeply affiliated with any party.
Probably closest to the Lib Dems but till we have a more proportional system (i.e. never) there's no point in voting for them round my way.

The point is there is a power imbalance or perceived one in counsellor-client relationships, therefore direct questions tend to be discouraged because a) who’s benefit is it for and b) would the client have volunteered that information had they not been asked.

I’m not saying asking that question denotes a power imbalance, what I’m saying is maybe consider why you want to know. Have they said something that makes you think they voted a certain way and therefore are you trying to confirm your own beliefs. Imagine you liked the person before asking them that question, would how they answer significantly change that initial reaction to them?


As for Britain and Tribal politics, Brexit is the biggest example of Tribal politics existing of course it all happened after the referendum. But how many people claimed they voted Remain as a method of displaying their virtue. And why? Because people like to pretend they are good people whilst being arseholes to other people. And it has to be said, take away the headbangers on the leave side….and the level of contempt and vitriol directed at people for voting the wrong way in the referendum was largely one way traffic.
This was one big giant sulk and it made me ashamed to associate with such people. I wasn’t happy with the result, I wanted to avoid a no deal Brexit but when it was finally done and dusted with, I moved on and people with no skin in the game other than learning that the country wasn’t quite this quaint Richard Curtis fantasy they imagined it to be still seethed with resentment, and instead of looking at why they lost….preferred to treat people who disagreed with them as the dirt under their feet.
That’s what tribalism does, makes you feel like part of an important community, you end up outsourcing your opinions to ones that are deemed acceptable by that community and you have an outgroup to despise

[HCZ_Reborn]

People vote the way they do because of their thoughts & opinion's on the subject matter which corresponds to it.
In no way is a vote ever more valid one way over the other.

That would suggest there is a 'right or wrong' vote - which is a dictatorship.

[Letters]

People vote the way they do because of their thoughts & opinion's on the subject matter which corresponds to it.
In no way is a vote ever more valid one way over the other.

That would suggest there is a 'right or wrong' vote - which is a dictatorship.

I think there are some issues where right and wrong is pretty clear.
I don't think Brexit is one of them, it is complicated.
But there are definitely better and worse ways of arriving at a decision.

Carefully researching the issue, the history of the EU, our relationship with it, the benefits and drawbacks of membership, arriving at a conclusion: good.
Believing a bus or a coin-flip: bad.