Jump to content

Because The British Royal Family


DougRichards

Recommended Posts

Apparently there is some raised eyebrows that The Prince and Princess of Canada were not at the family event, and apparently had not been invited.  Also they just lost their $20 million gig at Spotify.  That has to hurt old Harry Markle's bottom line...  

Bets on how long it is before she dumps him and his todger...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 784
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

8 hours ago, DB said:

Nobody but you and some tired tabloid hacks cares.

Wow, touch a nerve?  I am just glad that the Markles have FINALLY worn out their welcome.  They are so annoyingly sanctimonious.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Murph said:

Wow, touch a nerve?  I am just glad that the Markles have FINALLY worn out their welcome.  They are so annoyingly sanctimonious.  

murph, do you even realise that you and these newspaper hacks are the ones that keep them alive and away from well-deserved fall to obscurity? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly, it is just on my various news feeds they seem to be always there with some new "outrage" they are "outraged" about, or some self mastubatory libtard award they are getting for spouting the proper libtard platitudes, while spending other peoples money.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DB said:

You want to categorise those by rebuttals versus tabloid content?

i thought who posts what was clear enogh for all participants, but , yes you´re right, not all posts are the same

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Murph said:

Possibly, it is just on my various news feeds they seem to be always there with some new "outrage" they are "outraged" about, or some self mastubatory libtard award they are getting for spouting the proper libtard platitudes, while spending other peoples money.  

after covid came i dropped all newsfeeds that use exclamation marks. 

i dropped all social media 2013 (except Tanknet an est. mil. forum). 

if it weren´t for biggest war in Europe after ww2 right next door, i think that i would live the least stressful life of all Tanknet members , at least going by all most posts around here 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Murph said:

Possibly, it is just on my various news feeds they seem to be always there with some new "outrage" they are "outraged" about, 

Literally, the proverbial filter bubble at work. I get some exposure of them (once every other month) in some newspapers (and if I cannot avert the gaze on tabloid covers at the news stand). Sure, there's web portals that try to feed me this unhealthy diet of the Sussexes, but if I have to visit them, I'll do so with all cookies being deleted after a session. While there are techniques and technologies to identify specific browsers for persistent user surveillance, up to this point my impression is that they are rarely being used.

As a consequence, yes, I have casual knowledge of the existence of these freaks - but only very intermittent and sparse exposure, whether its the Kardashians, those of Sussex, or whatever other freak of the month happens to being paraded.

Avoid the personalized newsfeeds, is my advice. One wrong click sends you right into the feedback loop. These vacuous celebs are the most obvious symptom. But filter bubbles are around us for other topics too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am still getting loads of red pill relationship stuff after the relatively deep dive I did a month or two ago.

Now I have to look up orthopaedic stuff about L5/S1 slipped discs and expect to get loads of "woo" from charlapractics with their back-cracking fakery.

Edited by DB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Literally, the proverbial filter bubble at work. I get some exposure of them (once every other month) in some newspapers (and if I cannot avert the gaze on tabloid covers at the news stand). Sure, there's web portals that try to feed me this unhealthy diet of the Sussexes, but if I have to visit them, I'll do so with all cookies being deleted after a session. While there are techniques and technologies to identify specific browsers for persistent user surveillance, up to this point my impression is that they are rarely being used.

As a consequence, yes, I have casual knowledge of the existence of these freaks - but only very intermittent and sparse exposure, whether its the Kardashians, those of Sussex, or whatever other freak of the month happens to being paraded.

Avoid the personalized newsfeeds, is my advice. One wrong click sends you right into the feedback loop. These vacuous celebs are the most obvious symptom. But filter bubbles are around us for other topics too.

Yeah, I have had to go in and block mention of them on the feeds just to keep them off the radar.  I hate having to tweak the feeds, but....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no way to not influence the feeds that you subscribe to. Even if you go the route of the extreme anonymity amount that is still somewhat practical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Murph said:

How for all you Subjects of the Crown, how IS King Charles III doing so far?  

For the fortieth time... My passport calls me a "British Citizen". it has done for the fifty or so years I've owned one.

Secondly, King Charles has exactly no effect on my daily life, so judging "how he is doing" is impossible.

If I were to care for what the media reports on him, I'd be able to judge "how he is doing" exactly as well as you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Ssnake said:

There's no way to not influence the feeds that you subscribe to. Even if you go the route of the extreme anonymity amount that is still somewhat practical.

So I have learned.  Bummer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, DB said:

For the fortieth time... My passport calls me a "British Citizen". it has done for the fifty or so years I've owned one.

Secondly, King Charles has exactly no effect on my daily life, so judging "how he is doing" is impossible.

If I were to care for what the media reports on him, I'd be able to judge "how he is doing" exactly as well as you can.

i asked that from the matron of the familiy in Leeds i stayed with back in 1994 , she said milk seems to go sour sooner, if left out, but that´s about it  😀

Edited by bd1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had two moons rise last night, and a greater than usual incidence of Werewolf attacks, I'm not sure if there is any connection? :)

I think the problem is that Americans expect, as their President is effectively  an elected monarch, they expect our Monarchs to bbe just as colourful and incident prone. In fact most Britons seem to regard Elizabeth IIs reign as so successful because there were so few incidents. Its not really what we have them for.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason why I don't read papers much is that at least one article about the royal family is in every paper every day. Were bombarded with news about them, which is anyway usually just made up tabloid crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...