• The ResetEra Games of the Year Awards 2018 results are now live! Congratulations to all the winners!
  • Sidebar and Width settings will now no longer reset after 4 hours of inactivity! We have implemented a new system that will remember these preferences on each browser, for both members and guests. This allows you to choose different settings on different devices if you so desire.

Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson hits out at 'snowflake generation' for 'looking for a reason to be offended (Update: The Rock Says Interview Never Happened)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oct 25, 2017
12,520
USA
No im not. Thats you not understanding anything about what im saying. I never stated his apology was good enough. I said it was subjective on how you accept it. Thus why, you can hate him. But please. Continue to put words in my mouth to make something more of what Im saying. It aligns with this thread ironically.
"You can hate him if you want, but" is a dismissal of valid criticism, full stop. If that's not what you mean then you're doing a poor job of explaining it.

But sure, yeah, throw my push back into the pile of "outrage", I guess.
 
Oct 27, 2017
929
Halifax, NS
No im not. Thats you not understanding anything about what im saying. I never stated his apology was good enough. I said it was subjective on how you accept it. Thus why, you can hate him. But please. Continue to put words in my mouth to make something more of what Im saying. It aligns with this thread ironically.
Except MY initial statement was in response to someone saying that he apologized via Instagram, something that is factually not true. You came in and, deciding to ignore all context as to what a genuine/nongenuine apology means, interject with "but he technically did apologize at some point", which serves literally NO purpose but to run defense for Hart and dismiss those arguing his apologies aren't genuine. That's the actual effect your pedantic posts are achieving.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,574
People didnt jump to conclusions? Lol ok.
Sort of seems like using "People jumped to conclusions" to describe "People believed a news article" is a real bad way of looking at things my friend. But I'll keep an eye out next time y'all agree with some article that gets posted here on Era and make sure to point out you're just jumping to conclusions
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,299
Miami, FL
I looked at the original article and thought it was shady as hell, looks like a high schooler wrote it. But had no reason to check and see if they would literally fabricate the entire thing.. usually people aren't that bold.
That’s fair. I just assumed it had been vetted before I saw the thread when it was around 12 pages long. After all, bullshit doesn’t usually stick around for that many posts without someone really checking the source. UK Daily Star’s website is lol.

Also, National Inquirer fabricates whole stories and interviews too and folks eat it up. People are weird. IDK.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,520
USA
That’s fair. I just assumed it had been vetted before in saw it around 12 pages long. After all, bullshit doesn’t usually stick around for that many posts without someone really checking the source. UK Daily Star’s website is lol.

Also, National Inquirer fabricates whole stories and interviews too and folks eat it up. People are weird. IDK.
I mean I would have recognized the freaking National Inquirer lol. But yeah not familiar with that shady source.
 

F2BBm3ga

Banned
Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,147
Except MY initial statement was in response to someone saying that he apologized via Instagram, something that is factually not true. You came in and, deciding to ignore all context as to what a genuine/nongenuine apology means, interject with "but he technically did apologize", which serves literally NO purpose but to run defense for Hart.
You saying he “never” apologized means you know, never. Not a certain circumstance. Just straight up never. No matter how poorly executed, badly explained, genuine or not (and only time will tell about genuine) he apologized. Its just a fact. we can talk about how garbage it was all we want, but facts are facts. He never went on record to rescind the apologies either. Now him being egotistical douche about it? Yea it makes his apologies seem frivalous, but he didnt rescind them. And they happened.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,088
So where is this interview where he says this? The Independent doesn't cite a source and the video above the story seems totally unrelated. It's bullshit, and it's now on them to provide a source or video otherwise they should take this down and issue an apology.
 

Dan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,472
So where is this interview where he says this? The Independent doesn't cite a source and the video above the story seems totally unrelated. It's bullshit, and it's now on them to provide a source or video otherwise they should take this down and issue an apology.
Oh, the Independent does cite a source. The Daily fucking Star. Shitheap of a rag.
 
Nov 1, 2017
4,347
UK
So where is this interview where he says this? The Independent doesn't cite a source and the video above the story seems totally unrelated. It's bullshit, and it's now on them to provide a source or video otherwise they should take this down and issue an apology.
It said it was in The Daily Star, which tells you all you need to know given its reputation for making shit up.

The Daily Star has been on a bit on an "anti-snowflake" crusade recently, and their target demographic are exactly the sorts of people who'll believe anything of that nature.
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,299
Miami, FL
I mean I would have recognized the freaking National Inquirer lol. But yeah not familiar with that shady source.
Yea that’s what I mean. We’d instantly disregard Inquirer, but new (to us)sources quoted by okay-ish sources (Independent) created just enough confusion for this to slip by. It’s just disappointing that none of us really looked at that source site (including The Independent). 2 minutes on that site and it’s clearly a trash outlet. Why didn’t UKEra correct this instantly? lol
 
Nov 11, 2017
680
User Warned: Antagonizing other members. "Hive-mind" rhetoric.
Lmao I can imagine so many of y'all itching to post too. Funny thing is something he didnt say triggered y'all in the same sense as the article implied. Hand clap Era!
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,520
USA
You saying he “never” apologized means you know, never. Not a certain circumstance. Just straight up never. No matter how poorly executed, badly explained, genuine or not (and only time will tell about genuine) he apologized. Its just a fact. we can talk about how garbage it was all we want, but facts are facts. He never went on record to rescind the apologies either. Now him being egotistical douche about it? Yea it makes his apologies seem frivalous, but he didnt rescind them. And they happened.
He rescinded them with his followup statements, whether he wanted to or not. Without question.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,593
Finland
I looked at the original article and thought it was shady as hell, looks like a high schooler wrote it. But had no reason to check and see if they would literally fabricate the entire thing.. usually people aren't that bold.
It's also clearly written with agenda, like it's clear where the writer stands on this issue. "He laid the smackdown on PC softies", "He spoke out after a flood of snowflake stories hit the headlines." Sounds like one of those Youtubers.
 
Oct 27, 2017
4,088
Oh, the Independent does cite a source. The Daily fucking Star. Shitheap of a rag.
It said it was in The Daily Star, which tells you all you need to know given its reputation for making shit up.

The Daily Star has been on a bit on an "anti-snowflake" crusade recently, and their target demographic are exactly the sorts of people who'll believe anything of that nature.
Ugh. Fucking tabloid shitrag. I hope he sues them for libel and defamation, but he's probably too nice a guy to do that.
 
Oct 27, 2017
929
Halifax, NS
You saying he “never” apologized means you know, never. Not a certain circumstance. Just straight up never. No matter how poorly executed, badly explained, genuine or not (and only time will tell about genuine) he apologized. Its just a fact we can talk about how garbage it was all we want, but facts are facts. He never went on record to rescind the apologies either. Now him being egotistical douche about it? Yea it makes his apologies seem frivalous, but he didnt rescind them. And they happened.
Ask yourself, what exactly does being pedantic about this actually do for the topic at hand.

Like actually, 100%, what do you accomplish at the end of the day by being extremely pedantic (and again, ignoring all context) about this topic.

I'll tell you what you accomplish, you essentially add to the growing "but he apologized" camp who want to sweep this under the rug, and who, ACTUALLY IRONICALLY, have become snowflakes about being confronted by people who are, RIGHTFULLY, upset about how Hart has treated all this, because his frivolous attitude, as a public figure, shapes how many people will treat this kind of thing in the future, something that only serves to harm the very people complaining in the first place.
Ok you're just a troll then, fair enough. Guess it's time to ignore.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,520
USA
It's also clearly written with agenda, like it's clear where the writer stands on this issue. "He laid the smackdown on PC softies", "He spoke out after a flood of snowflake stories hit the headlines." Sounds like one of those Youtubers.
Lol yup. This shit was probably ghostwritten by Jacob Wohl.
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,299
Miami, FL
Outrage culture. Jumping to condemn people before hearing their side of the story.
No jumping to conclusions happens every day of the week and is old as time. You do so every day; it’s how your brain is designed to work. This was disappointment with someone people are already disappointed with, based on what they believed was a true story, quoted in a semi-respected source.
 
Nov 1, 2017
4,347
UK
Ugh. Fucking tabloid shitrag. I hope he sues them for libel and defamation, but he's probably too nice a guy to do that.
Unfortunately our libel laws are not conducive to actual justice, even you're rich enough to drag it through the courts. They won't bother though, they'll print a stamp sized correction on page 58 next week which no one will read, but that's apparently enough to cover their backs.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,159
I am not going to believe the interview did not happen unless he sues them because to completely make up a story like that does not come without ramifications
 
Oct 25, 2017
244
User Warned: "Hive-mind" rhetoric.
Whoever said or wrote it, it doesn’t seem all that wrong. People are being so progressive that any other opinion earns immediate exile.

Ex. Resetera
 
Oct 25, 2017
784
Glad to hear the interview was entirely fabricated and he didn't really spew that shit.

How competely pathetic does one have to be to fake an interview with some celeb in order to give their own shit tier views credibility?
 
Oct 27, 2017
764
People were going off the information that was available. Nothing gross about that.
I just can't accept this dismissal. While the fake story warranted criticism, the chorus of "fuck offs" is just too extreme of a reaction and it's exhausting. No one will come out and admit they jumped the gun. Why not show maturity and some humility?

Everyone wants to hold everyone else accountable but never themselves.
 
Oct 25, 2017
10,626
Wow, the Independent is usually a paper I have a fair amount of trust in. I'd have thought they'd at least vet the Star which is a known tabloid shitheap.
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,299
Miami, FL
Whoever said or wrote it, it doesn’t seem all that wrong. People are being so progressive that any other opinion earns immediate exile.

Ex. Resetera
Do you feel Era posters should apologize for offering a low threshold of tolerance for bigotry, hate, chauvinism, and dehumanization of women and minority groups?

Not every “opinion” is actually worth the pixels it ends up printed on.

It's almost as if people immediately jumped to being outraged or something

I'm shocked though, I really expected more from a news outlet that runs front pages like these

Yes, that’s what happens when people rush to post threads without checking the sources. The Independent failed, but we were the final arbiter here. Anyone could have read further, but everyone assumed it was true because the first source is relatively decent. We failed.
 
Oct 27, 2017
929
Halifax, NS
Whoever said or wrote it, it doesn’t seem all that wrong. People are being so progressive that any other opinion earns immediate exile.

Ex. Resetera
Perhaps you will be the person to finally provide an actual example, and not just be person #100 making a generalized statement and never following up on it.

So, point to an example.
 
Oct 25, 2017
12,520
USA
Perhaps you will be the person to finally provide an actual example, and not just be person #100 making a generalized statement and never following up on it.

So, point to an example.
To be fair, some people did provide examples, but they pretty much all consisted of defending transphobia, sexual harassment and sexism.. one of which got banned.

Now you know why the retreat back to their hole after throwing out a shitpost.
 

Dan

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,472
I just can't accept this dismissal. While the fake story warranted criticism, the chorus of "fuck offs" is just too extreme of a reaction and it's exhausting. No one will come out and admit they jumped the gun. Why not show maturity and some humility?

Everyone wants to hold everyone else accountable but never themselves.
Indeed. In these days of extra scrutiny when it comes to news sources, it's a sad thing to see the growing trend of jumping on any story in order to satisfy users own confirmation bias.
 
Oct 26, 2017
3,876
Appalachia
Glad to see this wasn't real. Still funny to see people come out of the woodwork to agree with these false statements, and to prove a lot of our points that y'all assume everything is some form of outrage (of course without being able to provide concrete examples or to even define where the line is for what they consider outrage).
 
Oct 25, 2017
8,299
Miami, FL
It’s interesting that some posters here think dislike of The Rock just started 10 hours ago. People have a long list of reasons why they dislike The Rock. This was just going to add to the list.

People’s lack of awareness of issues others have does not translate to “sudden outrage”. It just means you were under-informed.
 
Oct 25, 2017
244
Perhaps you will be the person to finally provide an actual example, and not just be person #100 making a generalized statement and never following up on it.

So, point to an example.
Just look at my post history. I likely vote the same way as much of the forum in recent elections - but there are certain things I disagree with. Was told to stop posting because I don’t engulf my life with everything said on the forum.
 
Nov 1, 2017
4,347
UK
Didn’t realize it was that type of publication
It's ok, it highlights the importance of considering the sources before we decide who to believe. Especially since our tabloids have always been able to get away with making up all sorts of guff.

A couple of past highlights though, for laughs.



 
Status
Not open for further replies.