Are you implying here that your post was "hilarious"? It wasn't.
This "spirit of b3ta" nonsense is always used to justify all kinds of crapness.
Post a joke = expect people to either enjoy it or not.
post your opinion = expect people to challenge you on it.
It's really as simple as that.
( Zuowan, Fri 12 Nov 2010, 12:27, 1 reply)

@zuowan
Actually, it's not my opinion. If I wanted to post my opinions and be challenged by po-faced cause-mongers, I'd go to the Guardian website (and I do).

If I want to talk bollocks in a flippant and potentially amusing manner, I'll come to b3ta.

And let's say, for the sake of argument, that I actually had boycotted Nestle products for last 20 years, it would have made not the slightest bit of difference - which is rather my point. Indeed, if everyone in the whole UK did, Nestle has still got emerging markets in Africa and China etc. BECAUSE they've been engaging in outrageous criminality there for decades.

As for the 'spirit of b3ta', I see it as this: if you make a joke about old people or women or any group that relies on a degree of stereotyping, you can't get uppity when someone makes a joke about something you care personally about. That's hypocrisy.

It's really as simple as that.
(Brand name, Sat 13 Nov 2010, 22:44, closed)

Did you just deny expressing your opinion while at the same time expressing it?
You absolutely did, didn't you?
Neither you nor I make the rules for what is or is not on b3ta, but I'm fairly sure the site's aims don't include "nobody is allowed to disagree with Brand name."
( Zuowan, Sun 14 Nov 2010, 8:30, closed)

well now . . .
Arguably we're into different territory in the 'replies', where main posts are discussed. The "opinion" I expressed in the main post isn't the same opinion I made in my reply to you. If you want to go off-board and get into a discussion, then the 'rules' change. Not my rules, but the rules of common sense.

Of course you can disagree, but disagreement only makes sense if both parties are basing their comments on mutually agreed parameters of discussion (and in a context of seriousness rather than broadly comedic site). If there is any 'rule', it's surely that posts are taken in the spirit in which they're offered. If someone posted about big tits and I replied that, actually, large breasts can be a great inconvenience to women, I'd be missing the point of the site.

Ultimately, the point is that this kind of extended discussion is of very little interest to anyone else. Which is why the Reply function was created in the the first place (to clear the main board of the tedious wankery you responded with and which I have foolishly extended through a combination of ego and boredom.)
(Brand name, Sun 14 Nov 2010, 12:45, closed)