Lando_Griffin wrote:s@int wrote:Lando_Griffin wrote:s@int wrote:woof woof ! wrote:bigmick wrote:So anyway my point is that the people who are long term posters who fell foul of the mods, are coincidently peoiple who have been on the side of the debate which has at times criticised the manager. Like I say though, I've a hunch you already knew that anyway. Perhaps it's just coincidence, who knows.
Mick . at some point just about everybody has criticised the manager, admittedly some have gone on to make a career out of it and I guess those are the ones (for those that can be bothered to take any notice) that have come to be known as "Anti's.
I asked the question about fences because I resent you assuming that I sit on a particular side of any said fence, particularly when it just so happens you place me on the opposite side from banned members, the inference being that thier politics being different from mine influenced my (and other mods) decision when it came to issuing cards or bans.
Look at some high profile examples.
PeeWee, banned allowed back in then banned again, his banning had nothing to do with him being pro or anti , if you don't already know the reasons , ask s@int, he'll fill you in, even he feels PeeWee deserves a life ban for what he's been up to.
Stu, banned christ knows how many times allowed back in on several occasions, but was never banned because he was pro or anti, more through sheer volume of complaints received about his stinking attitude, one that was forcing other members to quit the forum
Barry, banned allowed back in banned again allowed back in currently on four cards and none of them issued because the mods thought he was too pro or anti
Lando, banned allowed back in , currently on four cards and more than likely to earn himself another which will bring a ban, but again not because the mods consider him to be pro or anti.
GBJH (aka Bill and several other alias') Self admitted WUM, good old bill mad about lfc here for a laugh and a bit of mischief even a wind up in the hillsborough thread was ok in his book. Well think on. Again, banned and not because he was pro or anti.
Think yer might be seeing a pattern here Mick ?
clue , people aren't carded or banned because thier poitics may differ from mine or indeed other mods.
FACT.
I don't want to get into ANOTHER argument with you woof but , shouldn't you be banned for disclosing what was in a personal message
Seriously, Lando and Barry have been on 4 cards for a while now, their "style" of posting is still full of abuse, and I am pretty sure if they had been on one or two cards rather than four, their posts since would have got them many more cards.
I appreciate you don't want to ban them, but what is the point of giving them four cards if after that they are given carte blanch to continue their abusive ways?
Why, because without me and Barry you would have no-one to dig up your stats from the Manchester Utd website for, dear boy...
Just stating the truth mate, you know it just as well as anyone. You haven't toned down the abuse since you got your cards, yet miraculously the fifth card hasn't arrived.
You used to be a laugh, and I know you are a decent bloke but its started getting a bit much now mate.
If they had applied the same rules now as they did when you got your other cards you know as well as me that you would have been banned some while ago.... true?
Like I said I can understand their reluctance, but what is the point of giving ANYONE 4 cards if after that they turn a blind eye and give them carte blanche to do as they please?
I would summise that I will indeed receive the much maligned "5th Card" eventually - should I ever explore the depths of your friends Peewee and Bam.
Mine is a higher class of insult, you see. It may involve disgusting terms and promises sexual violence, but it is never at the ridicule of an ill person, or disrespectful to those with disabilities.
Only a cup of vegetable soup would consider my abuse to be intended with serious malice.
And that, dear boy, is the difference.
The problem is Lando that as soon as you start with the abuse, other people take umbridge and feel the need to reciprocate in kind. This then leads to further insults and another thread is ruined and another flame war has begun.
Surely you can accept that others have the right to different opinions than your own, so why not just state your opinion about the topic raised rather than the poster?
No one objects to you questioning the reasons behind their opinions, but most object to being told to "rape a goat" or questions about their sexual activities.
