Who else hates this guy (Gregg Wallace)?

dlockers said:
I'm not sure why you keep getting so offended - I don't mean "triggering" as an insult to you. And my last post was sincere - if you break it up into two sentences, he did cross the line. Without deep-dive analysing it, it just sounded like a hesitation to me.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting offended, you just keep using it when there's very little to suggest I was triggered by anything.

My original post with the link to the video in no way suggests that it triggered me, it was just a simple point that his delivery of things was a bit odd, and if he's talking like that in private and taking it further/not checking himself because the cameras aren't on, it's not that much of a surprise.
 
Ayahuasca said:
I'm not getting offended, you just keep using it when there's very little to suggest I was triggered by anything.

My original post with the link to the video in no way suggests that it triggered me, it was just a simple point that his delivery of things was a bit odd, and if he's talking like that in private and taking it further/not checking himself because the cameras aren't on, it's not that much of a surprise.
Click to expand...
Right, and my question was, was that what triggered you to post it / raise it as "evidence". I was querying what the actual problem was, and I never at all heard it how you said, until you wrote it as such. Jeesh man.
 
dlockers said:
Right, and my question was, was that what triggered you to post it / raise it as "evidence". I was querying what the actual problem was, and I never at all heard it how you said, until you wrote it as such. Jeesh man.
Click to expand...

You could just be honest and admit that you didn't use triggered in that sense, i.e. asking me what triggered me to post it.

If you didn't hear it that way, that's fine, but there's no need to keep suggesting that a poster is triggered because they had a different take on it, that seems like projection.
 
Last edited:
Ayahuasca said:
You could just be honest and admit that you didn't use triggered in that sense, i.e. asking me what triggered me to post it.

If you didn't hear it that way, that's fine, but there's no need to keep suggesting that a poster is triggered because they had a different take on it, that seems like projection.
Click to expand...
What triggered you to post it / what was triggering in that video for you to post it - semantics. Whether you are more at peace with this definition or the other, sounds like a you problem.
 
dlockers said:
What triggered you to post it / what was triggering in that video for you to post it - semantics. Whether you are more at peace with this definition or the other, sounds like a you problem.
Click to expand...

It's not semantics, it's very clear in your posts how you used it.
 
LOL after rewatching it for a 3rd time i can actually see now how it could be interpreted differently... however even as someone fairly smutty i would never have taken it that way.
 
Ayahuasca said:
It's not semantics, it's very clear in your posts how you used it.
Click to expand...
The meaning is the same - what in that video that triggered you - response: "I believe he said munch ya, ya tart" would have been sufficient for me to get your point. Instead you went on some sarky rant and referenced some other poster who is following me around the forum.
 
Last edited:
dlockers said:
The meaning is the same - what in that video triggered you - response: "I believe he said munch ya, ya tart" would have been sufficient for me to get your point. Instead you went on some sarky rant and referenced some other poster who is following me around the forum.
Click to expand...

It's not the same thing to be triggered by something in a video, as you suggested I was, and to see something that triggers you to make a post about it. One suggests that I was offended by something in the video, the other could just be curiosity. It was quite clear in the writing in my post around the video that I wasn't triggered by it.

I wasn't going on a sarcastic rant, I was just giving an example that I could use, if that's how easy it is for you to suggest that someone is triggered.
 
Last edited:
Ayahuasca said:
It's not the same thing to be triggered by something in a video, as you suggested I was, and to see something that triggers you to make a post about it. One suggests that I was offended by something in the video, the other could just be curiosity. It was quite clear in the writing in my post around the video that I wasn't triggered by it.
Click to expand...
That would make sense if you didn't top and tail it with assertations about him being built differently, and if he's willing to do this in front of the camera etc etc
 
dlockers said:
That would make sense if you didn't top and tail it with assertations about him being built differently, and if he's willing to do this in front of the camera etc etc
Click to expand...

It still makes sense with those taken into account. Making assertions doesn't mean that something in the video offended me.
 
Littlenose said:
I think his words were "You've got a soggy bottom"... not "your pastry has a soggy bottom"
Click to expand...
and the way the phrase was delivered is absolutely key, if done in a carry on style with a little smirk and a giggle as so much of his 'banter' is then it is easily to see how some people were offended. I've never really liked his style but until he came out with his response video I didn't think he'd done anything worth more than a slap on the wrist and really all that was highlighted was the incompetency of the BBC in not managing him properly over the years when complaints were made. Could all have been avoided if earlier in the process a strong and decisive message had been delivered that his 'little jokes' were not acceptable and he needed to change his approach, now his career is in ruins and he banged the final nails in the coffin himself with a very poorly judged video yesterday which really makes me question what sort of support network he has in place.
 
All a load of ******* nonsense if you ask me.

Now they want the current series of Masterchef stopped. How nice for the chefs who have put in hard work and effort to get where they are on the show
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom