You couldn't make it up.
Sweet *Betty* on Walford Web fancies himself a mature adult, but - at eighteen - he has yet to realise that freedom of speech and honesty, at times, has to be tempered with tact. Diddums has been ticked off by a real adult for refusing to be less than honest with another person in order to boost the other person's feelings and show a little tact.
He refused to do this, which is the childish way. In a perfect world, we could all be honest with each other and say what we thought, but then there would probably be a lot more crimes of violence and wars than there are in this day and age. It's why diplomacy is used. So Child *Betty* would eschew that, especially when the victim of his criticism is either in a vulnerable position compared to him or (if he's not) when Baby *Betty* is ensconced safely behind the anonymity of a computer screen and occupying the position of a quasi-moderator in order to flex his faux strength.
*Betty* is the stuff from whence cometh dictators. I'll bet Hitler was once a *Betty*.
Conversely, *Betty* is adamant about being "honest" in his criticisms of someone, irregardless of their feelings, but *Betty* should be cognizant of the fact that people are being kind to him in their guarded praise of his fan fiction and his ideas - especially the ludicrous witness protection reincarnation of Kathy.
Let me borrow *Betty's* philosophy long enough to say that his idea to bring Kathy back to life sucks shit, like his fan fiction. And he'd better get used to being on the receiving end of honesty, because university professors spare no words in their critiques.
There's a thread on Walford Web about Shirley and her daughter Carly at the moment, where an altercation is brewing between He-Who-Is-Omniscient (AKA *Betty*) and a lesser mortal known as EEFanatic.
*Betty* uncompromisingly pronounces the actress Kellie Shirley as being "out of her depth" during her time on Eastenders. This is an eighteen year-old, with no life experience and absolutely no professional experience which entitles him to comment upon her performance or acting ability. EEFanatic disagrees, which is his right, wondering why, if Kellie Shirley were so bad and "out of her depth", she attained many other film and stage roles subsequent to Eastenders. He actually pointed out, quite politely, that *Betty* was merely expressing an opinion, not fact, and just because he said as much, didn't mean it was necessarily true.
Of course, that got sweet *Betty's* dander well and truly up. Betty prissily pontificated that the acting industry is all about being at the right place at the right time and having the right look. He then went onto say that Kellie Shirley has a "film" look, and that better actresses than she - naming Jessie Wallace, Letitia Dean and Lacey Turner - had failed the Hollywood "test" because of their looks.
Run that by me again ... Because none of those three had been summoned to or even tried to crack Hollywood. I never thought Dean was bothered, and Wallace was the sort to wait to be asked rather than try any gumption for herself. Turner is still learning the ropes. Dean, I thought, was more of a stage actress than films anyway, and besides, the UK has a burgeoning and very successful film industry, so one wonders why none of these women have been cast in any sort of British film. It can't be their "looks" because Glenda Jackson had a lucrative film career on both sides of the Pond, and no one ever thought she was a raving beauty.
Could it be that, as good as they are in the roles they've played (namely on Eastenders), that they're rather limited in the scope of their acting? They're the industry's equivalent of one-trick ponies - good at what they do, but not so brilliant when it comes to doing other things. The woman who played Nigel's wife in Eastenders is often seen in British films, including bagging a significant part in Howard's End. Paul Bradley, himself, who played Nigel, was featured in an Academy Award-winning film, The Pianist.
I'm not certain that Letitia Dean pursued a film career upon leaving Eastenders. She seems to be a pretty clued-in professional, who knows exactly what she can and cannot do. Whatever the other two actresses mentioned did or didn't do, it certainly didn't merit the rest of *Betty's total rant at EEFanatic, who dared to challenge a view he expressed as fact (when it was only an opinion).
Apparently, according to *Betty*, the fact that Kellie Shirley got other work subsequent to Eastenders, didn't mean she was good, it merely meant that she was lucky. He then told EEFanatic to "get off his high horse," to "grow up" and that if he were not mature enough to debate, then he shouldn't join in. Besides, *Betty* was right about Kellie Shirley, because he's yet to see anyone give her a good review and she was a crap actress.
So there.
Well, I'd say *Betty* needs to learn that, whilst he's entitled to his own opinion, he isn't entitled to his own facts, and also, he happens to be a "forum host" on Walford Web, which is a quasi-moderator; and what he said and the tone in which he said that to EEFanatic wasn't moderation at all. It was pure passive-aggressive bullying and intimidation. How dare this lowly poster either challenge his opinion (which he expresses as fact)! To do so, simply means the perpetrator has to be shot down in flames.
Someone certainly isn't mature enough to debate, but it isn't EEFanatic.
The whole ethos behind the establishment of this forum was intelligent, civil debate and discussion amongst adults; however, it seems to be patrolled lately by spoiled brats who specialise in passive-aggressive bullying and who tolerate no divergence of opinion.
Sorry, but it looks like *Betty* has a lot of growing up to do.
Anyway, here's a song for you to contemplate, *Betty* ... if the shoe fits ...
Sweet *Betty* on Walford Web fancies himself a mature adult, but - at eighteen - he has yet to realise that freedom of speech and honesty, at times, has to be tempered with tact. Diddums has been ticked off by a real adult for refusing to be less than honest with another person in order to boost the other person's feelings and show a little tact.
He refused to do this, which is the childish way. In a perfect world, we could all be honest with each other and say what we thought, but then there would probably be a lot more crimes of violence and wars than there are in this day and age. It's why diplomacy is used. So Child *Betty* would eschew that, especially when the victim of his criticism is either in a vulnerable position compared to him or (if he's not) when Baby *Betty* is ensconced safely behind the anonymity of a computer screen and occupying the position of a quasi-moderator in order to flex his faux strength.
*Betty* is the stuff from whence cometh dictators. I'll bet Hitler was once a *Betty*.
Conversely, *Betty* is adamant about being "honest" in his criticisms of someone, irregardless of their feelings, but *Betty* should be cognizant of the fact that people are being kind to him in their guarded praise of his fan fiction and his ideas - especially the ludicrous witness protection reincarnation of Kathy.
Let me borrow *Betty's* philosophy long enough to say that his idea to bring Kathy back to life sucks shit, like his fan fiction. And he'd better get used to being on the receiving end of honesty, because university professors spare no words in their critiques.
There's a thread on Walford Web about Shirley and her daughter Carly at the moment, where an altercation is brewing between He-Who-Is-Omniscient (AKA *Betty*) and a lesser mortal known as EEFanatic.
*Betty* uncompromisingly pronounces the actress Kellie Shirley as being "out of her depth" during her time on Eastenders. This is an eighteen year-old, with no life experience and absolutely no professional experience which entitles him to comment upon her performance or acting ability. EEFanatic disagrees, which is his right, wondering why, if Kellie Shirley were so bad and "out of her depth", she attained many other film and stage roles subsequent to Eastenders. He actually pointed out, quite politely, that *Betty* was merely expressing an opinion, not fact, and just because he said as much, didn't mean it was necessarily true.
Of course, that got sweet *Betty's* dander well and truly up. Betty prissily pontificated that the acting industry is all about being at the right place at the right time and having the right look. He then went onto say that Kellie Shirley has a "film" look, and that better actresses than she - naming Jessie Wallace, Letitia Dean and Lacey Turner - had failed the Hollywood "test" because of their looks.
Run that by me again ... Because none of those three had been summoned to or even tried to crack Hollywood. I never thought Dean was bothered, and Wallace was the sort to wait to be asked rather than try any gumption for herself. Turner is still learning the ropes. Dean, I thought, was more of a stage actress than films anyway, and besides, the UK has a burgeoning and very successful film industry, so one wonders why none of these women have been cast in any sort of British film. It can't be their "looks" because Glenda Jackson had a lucrative film career on both sides of the Pond, and no one ever thought she was a raving beauty.
Could it be that, as good as they are in the roles they've played (namely on Eastenders), that they're rather limited in the scope of their acting? They're the industry's equivalent of one-trick ponies - good at what they do, but not so brilliant when it comes to doing other things. The woman who played Nigel's wife in Eastenders is often seen in British films, including bagging a significant part in Howard's End. Paul Bradley, himself, who played Nigel, was featured in an Academy Award-winning film, The Pianist.
I'm not certain that Letitia Dean pursued a film career upon leaving Eastenders. She seems to be a pretty clued-in professional, who knows exactly what she can and cannot do. Whatever the other two actresses mentioned did or didn't do, it certainly didn't merit the rest of *Betty's total rant at EEFanatic, who dared to challenge a view he expressed as fact (when it was only an opinion).
Apparently, according to *Betty*, the fact that Kellie Shirley got other work subsequent to Eastenders, didn't mean she was good, it merely meant that she was lucky. He then told EEFanatic to "get off his high horse," to "grow up" and that if he were not mature enough to debate, then he shouldn't join in. Besides, *Betty* was right about Kellie Shirley, because he's yet to see anyone give her a good review and she was a crap actress.
So there.
Well, I'd say *Betty* needs to learn that, whilst he's entitled to his own opinion, he isn't entitled to his own facts, and also, he happens to be a "forum host" on Walford Web, which is a quasi-moderator; and what he said and the tone in which he said that to EEFanatic wasn't moderation at all. It was pure passive-aggressive bullying and intimidation. How dare this lowly poster either challenge his opinion (which he expresses as fact)! To do so, simply means the perpetrator has to be shot down in flames.
Someone certainly isn't mature enough to debate, but it isn't EEFanatic.
The whole ethos behind the establishment of this forum was intelligent, civil debate and discussion amongst adults; however, it seems to be patrolled lately by spoiled brats who specialise in passive-aggressive bullying and who tolerate no divergence of opinion.
Sorry, but it looks like *Betty* has a lot of growing up to do.
Anyway, here's a song for you to contemplate, *Betty* ... if the shoe fits ...
No comments:
Post a Comment