cptgaio

It is quite obvious that when I was talking about conspiracies I wasn't referring to you: it seemed clear to me so I didn't specify it; anyway, I apologize for the misunderstanding ;-). However, I must say something about your last post (and I'll try to be brief): I wouldn't want there to be confusion between an event and the ascertainment of responsibilities, and the motivations becoming something they are not. To give you an example (a mix between your post and the thesis presented in the documentary, if I understood it correctly from your comments because I don't intend to watch it), one thing is to stick to the fact (the beating, the terms "mass" indicate that there is already a preventive idea about the facts so forgive me if I don't use it), one thing is to ascertain responsibilities (and I believe they are still trying to do that), one thing is to assert that there was a subversive plan from the law enforcement: well, if this step is taken too, without the slightest certain evidence from what I understood, talking with many people, for me the whole thing starts to "smell" of conspiracy theory and where there are conspiracy theorists there is also a lot of confusion, both in good and bad faith. To clarify, from my point of view, that G8 (and all the others but here we enter the metapolitical realm so I’ll stop here) shouldn't even have been held and I think the incidents happened more due to bad organization (and the difficulty of setting up something like that in a complex city like Genoa, a reckless choice that I remember was made by the government preceding that of Papi: center-left if I'm not mistaken) than due to premeditation. Moreover, even if I risk looking like a pro-government (current) even though I am not, I remember very well that a few days earlier Casarini (is that his name?) declared war on the state and promised to break through the red zone: not exactly a speech that would help to ease the minds of the other side (the law enforcement) who might have expected everything at that point. So how do we put it? If there was premeditation, it was there on both sides but at this point, one thing is unclear to me. If Papi (and the leaders of the G8) gained something from it (but what in the end? did he not regain control of this nation after losing it briefly three years ago? and in at least theoretically democratic way) what did the other side (the disobedients) gain? It is obvious that these are rhetorical questions, I don’t want you to answer: mine are observations derived from gathering all the pieces I could reach, but, indeed, too much has been said, and these pieces have turned into thousands of subjectivities...

I can't stand the Arctic Monkeys or this "spin-off" either. As an aficionado of the genre, I can say that the real Baroque Pop can fortunately be found elsewhere. An interesting review, although, for me, not agreeable.

From the majority of the comments left by other users in response to the review, I meant, of course. PPS: it might not be relevant, but for personal reasons I always distrust those who see conspiracies everywhere.

It will be... I repeat that I haven't read the review, but I understand that ours is a jester based on the majority of the comments left. As for the rest (revisionism, spying, etc., etc.), we are, as already mentioned, delving into a subject that is now metaphysical, and therefore I don't want to explore it, at least not certainly on this page.
I can only say that no bell (many, many: and I'm not talking about those on DeB, but about those out there) from either side (but it should be said "from multiple sides" because the protesters certainly were not a unified front) that I've listened to so far about Genoa has managed to provide me with objective evidence supporting their version of events. Too much confusion, too much ideology, too much fighting for a power that no longer existed... all things that would confuse even the most steadfast rationalist. Bye. P.S.: I don't know what is written in the review, but I doubt it has sunk to more "ignoble" levels than some comments above.

No, I didn't take it personally (far from it... if you browse the site, you'll see I've been told worse than just an innocent little rooster): I was saying that in this context it seems too off-topic to delve into the discussion, also because, among other things, you may have noticed that my intervention was not regarding the review (which honestly I haven't read and won't read because so much has been said about Genoa that even objectivity has become subjectivity). That's all. I didn't question your knowledge of debaserian mechanics (which, between us, aren't that complicated, anyway), I expressed doubt about how you, and others (the majority rather than the minority), have "calculated" the reviewer: in my opinion, but that's just a personal opinion, in the wrong way. I saw Iside's link, and I'll tell you that it reinforced my view of the reviewer as a funny joker. The world is beautiful because it is diverse (or has it gone awry?) Best regards.

Between "cerca" and "forti" that "provoca" came out, it shouldn't be there. Sorry.

@Auricolare (comment 109): I’ll skip the poultry issue because we would need to discuss the meaning of DeB, and I don’t think that’s the right time for it. Regarding the reviewer who likes to tease, I think he’s just a cheeky trickster looking to provoke strong reactions. However, when it comes to the "razza perciolosa" (a terrible term, even if used metaphorically), I am quite convinced there’s worse misinformation out there, even concerning DeB. Regards.

Um, my friend, I recommend that you enable notifications only for reviews you consider crucial, because I think the problem is difficult to solve ;-)

@Casamorta: educazione cani

Hi Alessio, behave yourself.