Glasgow_Saint Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 Irony of the first order. Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 22 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 22 February, 2014 All negative posters should be banned.... See.hear.speak Do wonder how all you delicate flowers survive in the real world BOO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 Nobody should be banned for giving their thoughts, regardless of what you think of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 IF there were trolls on this forum, I wonder which existing posters they would most closely resemble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 Nobody should be banned for giving their thoughts, regardless of what you think of them. I agree, provided that their thoughts are genuine and that they are not one trick ponies who hijack virtually every thread with their tiresome repetitive personas. Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 Clear skate along with Persaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 22 February, 2014 Share Posted 22 February, 2014 Patron wasnt quite to the levels of other relentless tedious ****tards TBF to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Was out of his depth more than anything. But had nowhere near the previous of some posters. In all, was a convenient sacrificial lamb for the mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearsy Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Why was he ban for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delboy Dave Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 This is getting füçkïng ridiculous. Positive opinions only? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goatboy Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Quote Originally Posted by Pastor Patrón View Post Can you please add something of interest to the thread please? Either on topic or at least funny, rather then more passive aggressive phaggotry. st Chalet:and that's an infraction. Think SC got him on the homophobic tip. The best bit is that PP then pointed out to St Chalet that he had in fact not received an infraction. St Chalet then thanked him for pointing that out and imposed it. Ban was for totting up of points. Does his membership go up now like insurance premiums? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goatboy Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 I think 110_Persaint was banned for being Glasgow but I'm not sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 I think 110_Persaint was banned for being Glasgow but I'm not sure. This is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 This is getting füçkïng ridiculous. Positive opinions only? Its heading that way for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 The irony in all joining a same opinion forum would be the death of it, people starting threads for the banning of peope is not only hypocritical its pretty sad as we should all be better than that, if I did not get on with a fellow I would not go around his house and have a bevy with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirleysfc Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 The irony in all joining a same opinion forum would be the death of it, people starting threads for the banning of peope is not only hypocritical its pretty sad as we should all be better than that, if I did not get on with a fellow I would not go around his house and have a bevy with him. The irony of this Bazza is that you want everyone else to agree with you and slag off those that don't, hence your hilarious 17 - 0 thread. Apologies for bringing reason to a muppet show thread. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 The irony of this Bazza is that you want everyone else to agree with you and slag off those that don't, hence your hilarious 17 - 0 thread. Apologies for bringing reason to a muppet show thread. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I am not arsed if anyone agrees with me. Sent from my C3P0 unit from the Hoth system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 The irony in all joining a same opinion forum would be the death of it, people starting threads for the banning of peope is not only hypocritical its pretty sad as we should all be better than that, if I did not get on with a fellow I would not go around his house and have a bevy with him. What if he kept coming to your house and shouting the same thing time and time again through your letter box? #comparinglikewithlike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 What if he kept coming to your house and shouting the same thing time and time again through your letter box? #comparinglikewithlike The point I am making is the person is not forced to read anything written by anyone, they can ignore, not read and not complain about it, thats even worse than someone who constantly repeats everything ie someone going on and on abut a person or thieme they dislike, its hypocritical but at the same time mildly amusing to see all these threads about the person they so dont want to read. Sent from the East Wing burger king Death Star Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 The point I am making is the person is not forced to read anything written by anyone, they can ignore, not read and not complain about it, thats even worse than someone who constantly repeats everything ie someone going on and on abut a person or thieme they dislike, its hypocritical but at the same time mildly amusing to see all these threads about the person they so dont want to read. Sent from the East Wing burger king Death Star So if this annoying geezer keeps shouting stuff you disagree with through your letter box your solution is to put in some ear plugs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 So if this annoying geezer keeps shouting stuff you disagree with through your letter box your solution is to put in some ear plugs? Probably not but this is hardly the same situation is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Probably not but this is hardly the same situation is it? Not exactly, no. The 'like for like' real life comparison would be an 'annoying bloke standing next to you in pub' scenario. Ear plugs (ignore)? Go to a different pub (forum)? Ask the landlord to intervene (moderation)? or punch the bloke in the face (satisfying infraction)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry Sanchez Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Not exactly, no. The 'like for like' real life comparison would be an 'annoying bloke standing next to you in pub' scenario. Ear plugs (ignore)? Go to a different pub (forum)? Ask the landlord to intervene (moderation)? or punch the bloke in the face (satisfying infraction)? What about snitches get stitches? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 (edited) What if he kept coming to your house and shouting the same thing time and time again through your letter box? #comparinglikewithlike Bazza would move in next door and start cutting down your hedges. There is literally nowhere else to go if you want discuss Saints, so its not as if you can leave if you don't like things. Edited 23 February, 2014 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 What about snitches get stitches? As a dim man once said, wind it in you blurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 He wasn't infracted and subsequently banned for having or posting his opinion. HTH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Ironic that Glasgow knew he had been banned . I wonder how he'd know, does it come up on sky's ports or just that one of his own names can't post when he tried? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 He wasn't infracted and subsequently banned for having or posting his opinion. HTH. But it started with an opinion. He posted his opinion/ thread, the normal few (5-6) then immediately jumped on him without really reading his post... He retaliated and then got banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 (edited) But it started with an opinion. He posted his opinion/ thread, the normal few (5-6) then immediately jumped on him without really reading his post... He retaliated and then got banned. Scenario 1: I go down the pub one day Someone asks me what I'm drinking. London Pride I reply. Oh, I don't like ale, I much prefer lager says the bloke. A civil discussion about different types of beer ensues. The next day I go to the pub again and meet the same bloke and we have a chat about something else that we have different opinions about. Scenario 2: I go down the pub one day. Someone comes up to me as says: "Jesus Christ! What the **** are you drinking there? London Pride? What a load of sh*te that is. You should drink lager like me yer cardigan wearing dullard!". Yeah, but I like it, I reply. It's rubbish! You should drink lager like me, said the chap getting louder and louder. The next day I walk into the same pub and the same bloke comes up to me and says the same thing. This happens for several days. Both scenarios are a bloke offering an opinion. Highlighting that someone is "just giving their opinion on here" is missing the point somewhat. But you already know that of course. Edited 23 February, 2014 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Scenario 1: I go down the pub one day Someone asks me what I'm drinking. London Pride I reply. Oh, I don't like ale, I much prefer lager says the bloke. A civil discussion about different types of beer ensues. Scenario 2: I go down the pub one day. Someone comes up to me as says: "Jesus Christ! What the **** are you drinking there? London Pride? What a load of sh*te that is. You should drink lager like me yer cardigan wearing dullard!". Yeah, but I like it, I reply. It's rubbish! You should drink lager like me, said the chap getting louder and louder. The next day I walk into the same pub and the same bloke comes up to me and says the sane thing. This happens for several days. Both scenarios are a bloke offering an opinion. Highlighting that someone is "just giving their opinion" on here is missing the point somewhat. But you already know that of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 ^^^^^^^^ Post of the week. Trousers' I mean, not Glasgow's. It's nice not having to read what GS writes, the Ignore function is pretty handy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Sadly I think that Trousers is going to end up with brick dust on his forehead.... Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Sadly I think that Trousers is going to end up with brick dust on his forehead.... It was me that brought about the collapse of the Berlin Wall... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Sadly I think that Trousers is going to end up with brick dust on his forehead.... Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk No im open minded, but saying and showing is very different... I have asked a number of times for examples of my aggressive and "troll" posts but never get shown any.... Perhaps youd be good enough to back up your views and posts with some evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 (edited) No im open minded, but saying and showing is very different... I have asked a number of times for examples of my aggressive and "troll" posts but never get shown any.... Perhaps youd be good enough to back up your views and posts with some evidence? A good troll stays just below the detection radar...and then plays the "prove I'm a troll" card... (Just before they play the "they're all out to get me" persecution card...) Edited 23 February, 2014 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 No im open minded, but saying and showing is very different... I have asked a number of times for examples of my aggressive and "troll" posts but never get shown any.... Perhaps youd be good enough to back up your views and posts with some evidence? Have never classed your posts aggressive. Negative, repetitive, wind ups, yes, and the clever hilarious "three wise monkey" schtick (still don't get it) that you and your comrade in arms BS have cleverly adopted never ceases to raise a laugh. Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 A good troll stays just below the detection radar...and then plays the "prove I'm a troll" card... (Just before they play the "they're all out to get me" persecution card...) Ok so i am accussed of derailing every thread, but you can show me no examples? Ok I got a PM recently, i wont name the poster but it said.... "Hi Glasgow, you are a very good poster in my view and thank you for posting. Do you ever get tired of the abuse from the handful of posters that follow you from thread to thread?" My reply was this No i dont get tired as i dont take it personally.... Every poster that isnt postive all the time gets abuse - there are no exceptions on here!! We have been knocked out of both cups and won just 4 in 17 in the league.... But youre still not allowed to question mopo or any of the players........ opinions are allowed as long as its positive..... See.hear.speak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Ok so i am accussed of derailing every thread, but you can show me no examples? Ok I got a PM recently, i wont name the poster but it said.... "Hi Glasgow, you are a very good poster in my view and thank you for posting. Do you ever get tired of the abuse from the handful of posters that follow you from thread to thread?" My reply was this No i dont get tired as i dont take it personally.... Every poster that isnt postive all the time gets abuse - there are no exceptions on here!! We have been knocked out of both cups and won just 4 in 17 in the league.... But youre still not allowed to question mopo or any of the players........ opinions are allowed as long as its positive..... See.hear.speak Have you ever been wrong about anything on here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Have you ever been wrong about anything on here? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Yes What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 What? Example 1: i thought mopo / saints would take the Fa Cup seriously and thought it was our year to win a trophy I started this thread http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?48404-We-re-all-going-to-Wembley I was wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Example 1: i thought mopo / saints would take the Fa Cup seriously and thought it was our year to win a trophy I started this thread http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?48404-We-re-all-going-to-Wembley I was wrong Wrong in terms of your 'scepticism' or 'criticism' proving unfounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 (edited) Ok so i am accussed of derailing every thread, but you can show me no examples? Ok I got a PM recently, i wont name the poster but it said.... "Hi Glasgow, you are a very good poster in my view and thank you for posting. Do you ever get tired of the abuse from the handful of posters that follow you from thread to thread?" My reply was this No i dont get tired as i dont take it personally.... Every poster that isnt postive all the time gets abuse - there are no exceptions on here!! We have been knocked out of both cups and won just 4 in 17 in the league.... But youre still not allowed to question mopo or any of the players........ opinions are allowed as long as its positive..... See.hear.speak There are different ways of imparting an opinion. Take your "won 4 in 17" mantra for example. Another way of phrasing that might be: "We've only lost 'x'in 17 games, which isn't bad considering the bigger picture of us sitting comfortably in 8th/9th, but I wondered if anyone else was concerned about the fact we've only won 4 games in that timeframe?" Or, another approach would be to bang on about "only winning 4 out of 17" games without reflecting on the positive sides of our season at the same time. Putting it another way , IF someone was trolling the forum, which way of putting it would you go for? I would venture that you'd recommend going for the more provocative "boo hiss, we've only won 4 games" approach rather than the more pragmatic "we've only lost 'x'games and are sitting comfortably in 8th/9th" approach. Both different ways of expressing the same "opinion"... Edited 23 February, 2014 by trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 There are different ways of imparting an opinion. Take your "won 4 in 17" mantra for example. Another way of phrasing that might be: "We've only lost 'x'in 17 games, which isn't bad considering the bigger picture of us sitting comfortably in 8th/9th, but I wondered if anyone else was concerned about the fact we've only won 4 games in that timeframe?" Or, another approach would be to bang on about "only winning 4 out of 17" games without reflecting on the positive sides of our season at the same time. Putting it another way , IF someone was trolling the forum, which way of putting it would you go for? I would venture that you'd recommend going for the more provocative "boo hiss, we've only won 4 games" approach rather than the more pragmatic "we've only lost 'x'games and are sitting comfortably in 8th/9th" approach. Both different ways of expressing the same "opinion"... Or simply ask why the "4 in 17" mantra starts with the Arsenal away defeat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smirking_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Example 1: i thought mopo / saints would take the Fa Cup seriously and thought it was our year to win a trophy I started this thread http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?48404-We-re-all-going-to-Wembley I was wrong Oh my god your relentless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 There are different ways of imparting an opinion. Take your "won 4 in 17" mantra for example. Another way of phrasing that might be: "We've only lost 'x'in 17 games, which isn't bad considering the bigger picture of us sitting comfortably in 8th/9th, but I wondered if anyone else was concerned about the fact we've only won 4 games in that timeframe?" Or, another approach would be to bang on about "only winning 4 out of 17" games without reflecting on the positive sides of our season at the same time. Putting it another way , IF someone was trolling the forum, which way of putting it would you go for? I would venture that you'd recommend going for the more provocative "boo hiss, we've only won 4 games" approach rather than the more pragmatic "we've only lost 'x'games and are sitting comfortably in 8th/9th" approach. Both different ways of expressing the same "opinion"... I understand this and will try to rephrase my opinions in a more positive way. There does seem to be some sensitivity on here about criticising mopo or the club, although i dont fully understand this I will try to respect it. Youre a good guy trousers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Wrong in terms of your 'scepticism' or 'criticism' proving unfounded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glasgow_Saint Posted 23 February, 2014 Author Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Wrong in terms of your 'scepticism' or 'criticism' proving unfounded. Sorry was this a question? Yes another example.... I was wrong about JWP, i thought he was too weak and fragile to become a Saints or prem regular.... I was wrong as he has really improved this season, although he does seem out of favour just now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 23 February, 2014 Share Posted 23 February, 2014 Sorry was this a question? Yes another example.... I was wrong about JWP, i thought he was too weak and fragile to become a Saints or prem regular.... I was wrong as he has really improved this season, although he does seem out of favour just now. Come on pal, no need for false modesty - you're probably right on JWP too, even if I don't ever recall you banging on about him. 18,00+ posts and you struggle to think of examples when your warnings/criticisms proved wrong. Its tough at the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now