back to article 'Yeah, I'm like, SO backing Microsoft over Google, YAH'

A close runner-up – but still no cigar – was commentard Pat Att, who, on the news that Google was funding the printing of millions of copies of Charlie Hebdo, came out and said: Well done Google fund And well done The Register for showing the Charlie Hebdo covers. #JeSuisCharlie No further comment needed on that one. …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Over the last 15 years I have regularly enhanced my godsons' PCs to accommodate their latest games. I never play the games myself - the last I played to completion was "Breakout" on my Apple II in 1979.

    While waiting for Christmas dinner my godsons insisted I tried their Xbox One GTA V. The first thing I learned was that 15 years of game pad finger/thumb practice would have helped. The second thing was that you don't worry about traffic rules - even if you are trying not to attract the attention of the police.

    Dinner was finally heralded by snorts of despair. Apparently you are not supposed to stand by a petrol tanker while the helicopters are firing at you - just so you can see what scenarios have been anticipated. The resulting conflagration was a tip of the hat to the game designers.

  2. This post has been deleted by its author

  3. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    Many thanks for the Wooden Twig of Fail. I have to admit I could see it coming a mile off but I have no regrets.

    With respect to those who wondered who wrote the comment; I wonder why they wondered, wonder why it would even matter who wrote it.

    As to suggestions I may be adverse to bacon sarnies, with all which is implied in that, I can only say; in crusty white rolls, with fried egg, brown sauce and fried onions is my preference, white, British born and bred, C of E.

    And, no, it wasn't trolling. I simply do not accept that the bullying and hate which Charlie Hebdo has indulged in is legitimate free speech. I appreciate a good many will not agree with my opinion but I take comfort in knowing they will defend my right to express it.

    1. ThomH Silver badge

      Re: #JeSuisLeRameau

      My only problem with Charlie Hebdo is that I don't seem to get the joke. But there are lots of riotously popular comedies that leave me cold so that doesn't necessarily mean anything. If freedom of speech is used as a cover just to offend minorities then that's worthy of reproach but the principle of the freedom itself is still worth defending and, again, possibly I just don't get it.

      A sad part of the whole thing is the huge number of people that have seized the opportunity for reductive us versus them rhetoric; I think possibly you originally came across as one of those.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: #JeSuisLeRameau

        So, in your opinion, is there a difference between a cartoon mocking Jesus and a cartoon mocking Mohammed? And if there is, what is it?

        1. ThomH Silver badge

          Re: #JeSuisLeRameau @theodore

          There's a difference because there are a huge number of people that find the depiction of Mohammed offensive but there's no significant group that considers the depiction of Jesus offensive. So if you make any evaluation of potential offence then the outcome will differ.

          Thought of a really funny joke but are sensitive to people's feelings? The joke will probably have to be funnier if it's about Mohammed to make the one consideration outweigh the other.

          Just aiming to offend? Then don't bother with Jesus.

          Would prefer above all else not to offend? Then stick with Jesus.

          However there's absolutely no difference in my mind as to the protection that each cartoon should be given. Both should be equally protected in a secular state.

    2. Trevor_Pott Gold badge

      Re: #JeSuisLeRameau

      I will defend your right to say your piece, but I will also express my belief that your religion is fucking clownshoes. You have the right to believe what you want and to say what you want, but you have right to force me to think you're anything other than a befuddled and easily led twatdangle.

  4. Sebastian A

    I don't know if anyone really cares who wrote it. Your posting history or reputation doesn't ameliorate saying something spectacularly smart or dumb.

    You have the right to be offended by things other people say or do. But merely being offended doesn't make you right, or them wrong.

    1. W3dge

      Maybe you do have a right to be offended. But you don't have a right not to be offended. All this modern day pussy footing around in case you offend someone is pure bollocks.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        I agree...

        ...but sometimes offending millions of people who aren't terrorists is rewarding the terrorists by giving them exactly what they want.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: I agree...

          You have that wrong. Offence is taken, not given. "Millions" of people choose to be offended. The ability of those people to get bent out of shape about something doesn't magically confer to them (or their beliefs) significance, or accuracy.

          There are a bunch of people who get all angry about "the war on Christmas" and some who think that the US having a black president is treason. I can personally introduce you to at least 300 people who think that women shouldn't have rights and that anyone standing up for those rights ought to be lynched.

          Should we change our societies to suit them? Or alter what we say so as not to offend them? If we shouldn't treat these peckerheaded bigots with kid gloves, why should $religion get special treatment?

          If you get all offended because someone makes fun of your religion, or your belief in your own racial/gender/ethnic/whatever superiority then suck it the fuck up, princess, and get back to work.

          There are plenty of people out there who are actually trying to do bad things, like destroy our civil liberties or murder others that wasting our time getting all butthurt over who said what about whom is flat out deficient. So, in order to purposefully offend you, him, her, me, them and everyone else on the planet, please accept this ASCII depiction of every religion, prophet, deity, ideology, political stance, strand of DNA, heritage, clan, tribe, brand, corporation and whatever the hell else you can think of:


          In case you missed it, that's an ASCII penis. Because that's apparently (for reasons incomprehensible) offensive seemingly everywhere. Now, after you're done having a tantrum about the mean people on the internet who are allowed to say mean things, get the fuck over it and go do something productive with your existence.


  5. A Twig

    Can I please register my displeasure at the Wooden Twig award, I find it very offensive to both myself and all other twigs out there.

    Could you please leaf this alone and consider branching out into alternative award names? Perhaps a root and branch review would be appropriate.

    1. QuinnDexter

      Bark-ing up the wrong tree if you think The Reg won't stick to its decision

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019