Another hit! The Pap tribute thread.

[buctootim]

Thanks for the background info guys. Not a big miss it seems.

[Verbal]

Wow, you're a charmer, Verbal.

 

C'mon don't play naive, your spats with Pap are the stuff of legend. I find it all most amusing. No need to get on the defensive.

 

You miss my point. Why should Steve Grant apologise for 'the Verbal situation'? Whatever that might be (I certainly don't know). I have not had a single communication with Steve Grant about anything in about three years.

 

As for any 'spats', this person you call pap brought it all on his own head.

 

And I hardly think I was the only one on here who objected, for example, to his mouthing off about how Lee Rigby was pretending he'd had his head all but severed (etc., ad nauseum), and that his grieving family were state-sponsored liars.

[Lighthouse]

He doesn't seem to be any happier on Twitter these days

 

"Gonna have to call out a doctor. **** sake."

 

"Doctor won't come out, not interested. Says water and bland food and it may last a week. **** my ****ing bastard life."

 

Get well soon Will!

[hypochondriac]

He doesn't seem to be any happier on Twitter these days

 

"Gonna have to call out a doctor. **** sake."

 

"Doctor won't come out, not interested. Says water and bland food and it may last a week. **** my ****ing bastard life."

 

Get well soon Will!

 

Oh will. No golf for you for a few weeks

[buctootim]

You miss my point. Why should Steve Grant apologise for 'the Verbal situation'? Whatever that might be (I certainly don't know). I have not had a single communication with Steve Grant about anything in about three years.

 

As for any 'spats', this person you call pap brought it all on his own head.

 

And I hardly think I was the only one on here who objected, for example, to his mouthing off about how Lee Rigby was pretending he'd had his head all but severed (etc., ad nauseum), and that his grieving family were state-sponsored liars.

 

and anyone who called him out on his thrilled pleasure in human tragedy was angrily attacked as a government paid shill sent to disrupt his exposes and keep state secrets - as if he were either important or accurate. The Sarnia Saint of conspiracy theories.

 

tbf though it generated a cracking confession from CB Fry who was considering a new MI5 offer on good money to hound out a violent revolutionary from a popular carp fishing forum.

Edited 22 May, 2015 by buctootim

[Smirking_Saint]

He was actually called Saint_Will (or something much like that), and he used to go on about golf one hell of a lot (more than Phil even), hence the nickname.

 

I think I've got that right - I remember him being very touchy a lot of the time, until one day he lost it altogether.

 

If by 'lost it altogether' you mean 'went bat **** mental' then yes, though I felt a but sorry for him, was all a bit much in a reasonably comical way.

[saintbletch]

You miss my point. Why should Steve Grant apologise for 'the Verbal situation'? Whatever that might be (I certainly don't know). I have not had a single communication with Steve Grant about anything in about three years.

 

As for any 'spats', this person you call pap brought it all on his own head.

 

And I hardly think I was the only one on here who objected, for example, to his mouthing off about how Lee Rigby was pretending he'd had his head all but severed (etc., ad nauseum), and that his grieving family were state-sponsored liars.

 

I'm not trying to force anything into Lou's mouth, let alone words, but I think I can explain. She'll correct me if I've got it wrong I'm sure.

 

When pap was banned, Hypo speculated that pap had probably named you again. In reply Steve Grant, earlier in this thread, said that naming you was a small, but contributory factor in pap's banning.

 

I believe pap took issue with this suggestion, as he hadn't attempted to name you again.

 

I THINK this is the verbal situation for which Lou hypothetically suggested that The Man would offer an apology to pap.

 

I may have this all arse about face though.

Edited 22 May, 2015 by saintbletch

[Patrick Bateman]

Serious business

[buctootim]

Hypo speculated that pap had probably named you again. In reply Steve Grant, earlier in this thread, said that naming you was a small, but contributory factor in pap's banning.

 

I believe pap took issue with this suggestion, as he hadn't attempted to name you again.

 

Those two things aren't contradictory.

[saintbletch]

Those two things aren't contradictory.

 

I'm interpreting other people's actions here Tim, so I'm standing on shifting sand. That said...

 

Follow the link that Hypo posted at the beginning of the tread. He posted a link to a previous post of his where he speculated they pap's ban was for naming verbal AGAIN.

 

The man replied to that post, saying that this was a small but contributory factor.

 

I think The Man was staying that pap's ORIGINAL hints at verbal's identity were a factor.

 

Whereas if you read the thread as it appears, it suggests that a small, but contributory factor in pap's banning was that he attempted to name verbal AGAIN.

 

We're left scratching around and poking **** with sticks because we don't know definitively why pap was banned.

 

This is all moot anyway, we are were we are and it's not changing.

 

As I say I was trying to interpret other people's posts.

[Coxford_lou]

You miss my point. Why should Steve Grant apologise for 'the Verbal situation'? Whatever that might be (I certainly don't know). I have not had a single communication with Steve Grant about anything in about three years.

 

As for any 'spats', this person you call pap brought it all on his own head.

 

And I hardly think I was the only one on here who objected, for example, to his mouthing off about how Lee Rigby was pretending he'd had his head all but severed (etc., ad nauseum), and that his grieving family were state-sponsored liars.

 

Blimey Verbal. It was a joke message. I was making up a daft scenario where Pap and Steve Grant would meet (I doubt either would do so because I doubt either could give a monkeys) and to give some flesh to my daft scenario I imagined what Pap would ask of SG. Sorry I used your name for something you're clearly sensitive about. It definitely wasn't a dig at you, because before this little exchange, I've always enjoyed your posts.

[buctootim]

I'm interpreting other people's actions here Tim, so I'm standing on shifting sand. That said...

 

Follow the link that Hypo posted at the beginning of the tread. He posted a link to a previous post of his where he speculated they pap's ban was for naming verbal AGAIN.

 

The man replied to that post, saying that this was a small but contributory factor.

 

I think The Man was staying that pap's ORIGINAL hints at verbal's identity were a factor.

 

Whereas if you read the thread as it appears, it suggests that a small, but contributory factor in pap's banning was that he attempted to name verbal AGAIN.

 

We're left scratching around and poking **** with sticks because we don't know definitively why pap was banned.

 

This is all moot anyway, we are were we are and it's not changing.

 

As I say I was trying to interpret other people's posts.

 

Who knows, it was probably a lifetime achievement award rather than any one specific thing.

[Coxford_lou]

I'm not trying to force anything into Lou's mouth, let alone words, but I think I can explain. She'll correct me if I've got it wrong I'm sure.

 

When pap was banned, Hypo speculated that pap had probably named you again. In reply Steve Grant, earlier in this thread, said that naming you was a small, but contributory factor in pap's banning.

 

I believe pap took issue with this suggestion, as he hadn't attempted to name you again.

 

I THINK this is the verbal situation for which Lou hypothetically suggested that The Man would offer an apology to pap.

 

I may have this all arse about face though.

 

I guess, but it most of all it was just a joke. Not a very funny one, I admit, but definitely not "noodle headed garbage I've beamed into my brain".

 

As insults go, that was a particularly bonkers one. Which is ironic I guess........

[saintbletch]

Who knows, it was probably a lifetime achievement award rather than any one specific thing.

 

It wouldn't take much to make a case, would it.

 

Either way I think papster is pretty philosophical. As I've said earlier, the irony I see is that pap, alongside perhaps Alpine, have probably been on the end of some of the worst attacks (assuming that was a factor).

 

I mean look when CB Fry goes off on one, it can be brutal. I wouldn't want him banned, far from it, he's one of the most entertaining posters on the site. But when you see that lack of moderation consistency, you're left wondering, well to be honest Tim, you're left wondering if the government was involved.

 

There, I've said it.

[Coxford_lou]

But when you see that lack of moderation consistency, you're left wondering, well to be honest Tim, you're left wondering if the government was involved.

 

There, I've said it.

 

LOL!

[Verbal]

I guess, but it most of all it was just a joke. Not a very funny one, I admit, but definitely not "noodle headed garbage I've beamed into my brain".

 

As insults go, that was a particularly bonkers one. Which is ironic I guess........

 

For heaven's sake, Lou. Go back and read the sentence again. I wasn't accusing you of anything. And I'm sure the following is of interest to precisely no one, but here goes:

 

There are a number of people on here who know who I am. One of them is Weston Saint, who, presumably in a fit of geriatric rage during a small disagreement, decided to post my former company name here. Pap was on it like a ferret down the proverbial, and was soon dancing around with bits and pieces of my life that he posted on here. To be fair to the person known as pap, he didn't actually ever give my full name, but it was easy to add two and two.

 

Leave aside forum rules broken by Weston, here's the problem. In the recent past, I've made a number of films that have attracted the attentions of conspiracy theorists. They have targeted me by publishing my name, address and phone numbers in chat rooms and inviting people to do their worst. This included a racist attack (my wife is from South Asia).

 

My experience of conspiracy theorists over quite an extended period now is that among them are some seriously unhinged people. Some of them even commit the crimes which then other conspiracy theorists claim to be 'false flags'.

 

When Weston posted as he did, I asked the mods to remove it, precisely because I did not want pap, as a committed and it seems to me highly suggestible conspiracy theorist, to have private information about me. He has presented himself on here at times as deeply obsessed about people's 'real' identity, and appeared to revel in 'unmasking' posters and then using the information he gleaned to abuse and humiliate. He did that, for example, with another poster on here, who'd committed the apparently unspeakable crime of joining an online dating agency. The person known as pap has no right to do that, but he has a track record of following people around.

 

The present incarnation of pap is someone who's mildly grown up since then, although now with a nervous-tick-like penchant for cartoons which lack both wit and intelligence. More often than not, it's the same impulse to humiliate other posters that's at work in these failed efforts.

 

As for there being some kind of special rule for me on here - which pap was pretty assiduous in claiming - that is simply untrue, at least as far as I know. It's one of many lies he's put out about me. My refusal in the past to respond to his lies perhaps leads people to think his fairy tales are true. They are not.

 

I have no knowledge about pap's banning, and as I said earlier I'm sorry to see anyone leave. My strong inclination is to think that he is the author of his own misfortune. The Jeremy Clarkson of Saintsweb, if you will.

 

As the psycho says, serious business...

[Coxford_lou]

For heaven's sake, Lou. Go back and read the sentence again. I wasn't accusing you of anything. And I'm sure the following is of interest to precisely no one, but here goes:

 

There are a number of people on here who know who I am. One of them is Weston Saint, who, presumably in a fit of geriatric rage during a small disagreement, decided to post my former company name here. Pap was on it like a ferret down the proverbial, and was soon dancing around with bits and pieces of my life that he posted on here. To be fair to the person known as pap, he didn't actually ever give my full name, but it was easy to add two and two.

 

Leave aside forum rules broken by Weston, here's the problem. In the recent past, I've made a number of films that have attracted the attentions of conspiracy theorists. They have targeted me by publishing my name, address and phone numbers in chat rooms and inviting people to do their worst. This included a racist attack (my wife is from South Asia).

 

My experience of conspiracy theorists over quite an extended period now is that among them are some seriously unhinged people. Some of them even commit the crimes which then other conspiracy theorists claim to be 'false flags'.

 

When Weston posted as he did, I asked the mods to remove it, precisely because I did not want pap, as a committed and it seems to me highly suggestible conspiracy theorist, to have private information about me. He has presented himself on here at times as deeply obsessed about people's 'real' identity, and appeared to revel in 'unmasking' posters and then using the information he gleaned to abuse and humiliate. He did that, for example, with another poster on here, who'd committed the apparently unspeakable crime of joining an online dating agency. The person known as pap has no right to do that, but he has a track record of following people around.

 

The present incarnation of pap is someone who's mildly grown up since then, although now with a nervous-tick-like penchant for cartoons which lack both wit and intelligence. More often than not, it's the same impulse to humiliate other posters that's at work in these failed efforts.

 

As for there being some kind of special rule for me on here - which pap was pretty assiduous in claiming - that is simply untrue, at least as far as I know. It's one of many lies he's put out about me. My refusal in the past to respond to his lies perhaps leads people to think his fairy tales are true. They are not.

 

I have no knowledge about pap's banning, and as I said earlier I'm sorry to see anyone leave. My strong inclination is to think that he is the author of his own misfortune. The Jeremy Clarkson of Saintsweb, if you will.

 

As the psycho says, serious business...

 

See that's the thing, Verbal. I get all that, I've picked up on the issue before, and I've always openly taken your side on issues around anonymity. As well as most things really.

 

So given it was an attempt at lightheartedness (driven by the fact I like Steve Grant and I like Pap), I wasn't expecting your first exasperated (and as a result, kinda patronising) response. Maybe I'm more aware of your posting history than you are of mine. Who knows.

 

I suppose it serves me right for dipping my toes in something people obviously still feel strongly about. There you go, learnt that lesson.

 

Can we just end this storm in a tea cup? I hate falling out with people, it's really dull, and much more hard work than being merry.

[hypochondriac]

See that's the thing, Verbal. I get all that, I've picked up on the issue before, and I've always openly taken your side on issues around anonymity. As well as most things really.

 

So given it was an attempt at lightheartedness (driven by the fact I like Steve Grant and I like Pap), I wasn't expecting your first exasperated (and as a result, kinda patronising) response. Maybe I'm more aware of your posting history than you are of mine. Who knows.

 

I suppose it serves me right for dipping my toes in something people obviously still feel strongly about. There you go, learnt that lesson.

 

Can we just end this storm in a tea cup? I hate falling out with people, it's really dull, and much more hard work than being merry.

 

I really think you're making a big attention seeking drama about this. Verbal wasn't accusing you of anything. Just ignore it and move on...

[TheCholulaKid]

I really think you're making a big attention seeking drama about this. Verbal wasn't accusing you of anything. Just ignore it and move on...

 

LOL

[Goatboy]

I really think you're making a big attention seeking drama about this. Verbal wasn't accusing you of anything. Just ignore it and move on...

 

If only this was a site wide policy.

[CB Fry]

 

I mean look when CB Fry goes off on one, it can be brutal. I wouldn't want him banned, far from it, he's one of the most entertaining posters on the site. But when you see that lack of moderation consistency, you're left wondering, well to be honest Tim, you're left wondering if the government was involved.

 

There, I've said it.

 

Firstly, aw shucks. I think.

 

Secondly, great punchline.

 

Thirdedly, I would hope Pap never got infracted for anything he said to me, the reverse is definitely true. We slugged it out but both of us gave as good as we got. Ditto me and Alpine.

 

It's worth saying I have never being infracted for anything other than a handful of ticking offs for circumventing the fu cking swear filter. So someone must like me, or I am too irrelevant to worry about.

[CB Fry]

 

tbf though it generated a cracking confession from CB Fry who was considering a new MI5 offer on good money to hound out a violent revolutionary from a popular carp fishing forum.

 

Ha. I liked that one.

 

Up there with my playing chess with Sarnia Saint bit on the ....America thread as my favourite recent posts.

Edited 22 May, 2015 by CB Fry

[Coxford_lou]

LOL

 

LOL.

[Twiggy]

RIP.

 

Vive la Revolution.

[Jonnyboy]

For heaven's sake, Lou. Go back and read the sentence again. I wasn't accusing you of anything. And I'm sure the following is of interest to precisely no one, but here goes:

 

There are a number of people on here who know who I am. One of them is Weston Saint, who, presumably in a fit of geriatric rage during a small disagreement, decided to post my former company name here. Pap was on it like a ferret down the proverbial, and was soon dancing around with bits and pieces of my life that he posted on here. To be fair to the person known as pap, he didn't actually ever give my full name, but it was easy to add two and two.

 

Leave aside forum rules broken by Weston, here's the problem. In the recent past, I've made a number of films that have attracted the attentions of conspiracy theorists. They have targeted me by publishing my name, address and phone numbers in chat rooms and inviting people to do their worst. This included a racist attack (my wife is from South Asia).

 

My experience of conspiracy theorists over quite an extended period now is that among them are some seriously unhinged people. Some of them even commit the crimes which then other conspiracy theorists claim to be 'false flags'.

 

When Weston posted as he did, I asked the mods to remove it, precisely because I did not want pap, as a committed and it seems to me highly suggestible conspiracy theorist, to have private information about me. He has presented himself on here at times as deeply obsessed about people's 'real' identity, and appeared to revel in 'unmasking' posters and then using the information he gleaned to abuse and humiliate. He did that, for example, with another poster on here, who'd committed the apparently unspeakable crime of joining an online dating agency. The person known as pap has no right to do that, but he has a track record of following people around.

 

The present incarnation of pap is someone who's mildly grown up since then, although now with a nervous-tick-like penchant for cartoons which lack both wit and intelligence. More often than not, it's the same impulse to humiliate other posters that's at work in these failed efforts.

 

As for there being some kind of special rule for me on here - which pap was pretty assiduous in claiming - that is simply untrue, at least as far as I know. It's one of many lies he's put out about me. My refusal in the past to respond to his lies perhaps leads people to think his fairy tales are true. They are not.

 

I have no knowledge about pap's banning, and as I said earlier I'm sorry to see anyone leave. My strong inclination is to think that he is the author of his own misfortune. The Jeremy Clarkson of Saintsweb, if you will.

 

As the psycho says, serious business...

 

I haven't seen anything in the forum rules about attempting to humiliate forum members, having a lack of wit, or being unintelligent. They'd be no one left on here if that were the case.

[saintbletch]

Firstly, aw shucks. I think.

 

Secondly, great punchline.

 

Thirdedly, I would hope Pap never got infracted for anything he said to me, the reverse is definitely true. We slugged it out but both of us gave as good as we got. Ditto me and Alpine.

 

It's worth saying I have never being infracted for anything other than a handful of ticking offs for circumventing the fu cking swear filter. So someone must like me, or I am too irrelevant to worry about.

 

What punchline?

 

This is serious, CB Fry.

 

To be fair, I'm veering towards cock up and away from conspiracy. Sorry pap.

 

I think it far more likely that The Man lacks the experience. He seldom posts now, so I ASSUME that he doesn't have his finger on the pulse of forum social interactions. He fired from the hip, I'm guessing.

 

It's like playing Sunday league, and realising that your ref understands every law of the game, but has never played the game himself.

 

BTW I've just reported you for circumventing the swear filter.

[hypochondriac]

I haven't seen anything in the forum rules about attempting to humiliate forum members, having a lack of wit, or being unintelligent. They'd be no one left on here if that were the case.

 

You'd be the first to leave.

[Coxford_lou]

 

I think it far more likely that The Man lacks the experience. He seldom posts now, so I ASSUME that he doesn't have his finger on the pulse of forum social interactions. He fired from the hip, I'm guessing.

 

 

You're a wise man, Bletch.

[Goatboy]

You'd be the first to leave.

 

At least he'd have company.

[Jonnyboy]

You'd be the first to leave.

 

Lol, you'd love it if you were the only one on here. I wonder if it's actually possible to die from being bored by your own posts?

[saintbletch]

I too sometimes enjoyed his various contributions on here - I even agreed with him on occasion - however ''a bit too far'' may be your way of putting it, but not I think the choice of words I myself would employ. Thinking back on it, the notorious 'crisis actors and Lee Rigby' thread, the ludicrous claim that Israeli children are all brainwashed fanatics, even that NASA = NAZIS business that I remember so well, all when way beyond going a little ''too far'' methinks.

 

Are they not just syntactic sticks and semantic stones, CHAPEL END CHARLIE?

 

It's not clear (to me) from your post, but are you suggesting that pap should have been banned for seeing the world differently?

 

Or are you suggesting that pap contravened one of the clear laws we have as a society that protect others from verbal/written attacks?

[Goatboy]

Don't ask pap. He's in some sort of Kafkaesque internet dream.

[saintbletch]

Don't ask pap. He's in some sort of Kafkaesque internet dream.

 

Metamorphosis?

 

So the Man turned his back on pap because he'd turned into an insect?

 

Yeah, I can see that.

 

pap is Gregor, The Man is Gregor's father and I guess I'm Greta.

[whelk]

I don't think I have ever seen this notorious Pap conspiracy thread for the Lee Rigby murder. Seen numerous subsequent references and not sure I even knew who Pap was back then.

Anyone got a link? My search didn't see any obvious Fry v Pap toe to toe

[whelk]

Are they not just syntactic sticks and semantic stones, CHAPEL END CHARLIE?

 

It's not clear (to me) from your post, but are you suggesting that pap should have been banned for seeing the world differently?

 

Or are you suggesting that pap contravened one of the clear laws we have as a society that protect others from verbal/written attacks?

 

Exactly. And very well put.

[Coxford_lou]

Exactly. And very well put.

 

Yes, very well put Bletch.

 

The thing with Pap is, if you don't agree with him, you can just tell him, and he's fine with it.

[CB Fry]

I don't think I have ever seen this notorious Pap conspiracy thread for the Lee Rigby murder. Seen numerous subsequent references and not sure I even knew who Pap was back then.

Anyone got a link? My search didn't see any obvious Fry v Pap toe to toe

Maybe the mods have binned it, can't remember the title. It's a big un.

 

It was more multi-lateral than me v Pap, it was Pap vs Barry Sanchez ("where's the blood, Bazza" is the catchphrase of that thread, based on Pap's falling H, L and S for a YouTube conspiro-doc saying that the TV stations super imposed blood on the hands of the innocent nutcase what done it.)

 

....and Pap vs Tim, Verbal, Hypo and the rest of sensible humanity. I imagine SOG was scuttling about in his conspiro-for-beginners role cheerleading along but not sure.

 

Basically "official narratives" we're challenged by our resident thinker and the rest of us piled in. The nurse who tried to help Rigby was an actress. That kind of conspiro-by-numbers guff.

 

I remember poor old Lou being shocked by the McCann thread when that got dragged from the depths, I think she'd take to the Rigby era Pap thread even less.

[sadoldgit]

Should we be talking about someone behind his back when he cant defend himself?

[CB Fry]

Should we be talking about someone behind his back when he cant defend himself?

And here he scuttles in. Almost like you and Pap are the same person.

[Batman]

Yes, very well put Bletch.

 

The thing with Pap is, if you don't agree with him, you can just tell him, and he's fine with it.

 

[Batman]

Maybe the mods have binned it, can't remember the title. It's a big un.

 

It was more multi-lateral than me v Pap, it was Pap vs Barry Sanchez ("where's the blood, Bazza" is the catchphrase of that thread, based on Pap's falling H, L and S for a YouTube conspiro-doc saying that the TV stations super imposed blood on the hands of the innocent nutcase what done it.)

 

....and Pap vs Tim, Verbal, Hypo and the rest of sensible humanity. I imagine SOG was scuttling about in his conspiro-for-beginners role cheerleading along but not sure.

 

Basically "official narratives" we're challenged by our resident thinker and the rest of us piled in. The nurse who tried to help Rigby was an actress. That kind of conspiro-by-numbers guff.

 

I remember poor old Lou being shocked by the McCann thread when that got dragged from the depths, I think she'd take to the Rigby era Pap thread even less.

 

on a lesser note, the Boston Bomb musings are worth remembering.

im sure it was there I first read the term 'crisis actor' on a football message board

[CB Fry]

on a lesser note, the Boston Bomb musings are worth remembering.

im sure it was there I first read the term 'crisis actor' on a football message board

Oh yeah. I think there was that one, Rigby and a general 9/11 conspiracy thread all running on and off at about the same time. Basically those three threads were the battlegrounds.

 

But maybe we've got it wrong and Lou is right. Pap said the Boston Bomb was a false flag, we all said we disagreed and he was, indeed, "fine with it". That's what happened.

[hypochondriac]

Oh yeah. I think there was that one, Rigby and a general 9/11 conspiracy thread all running on and off at about the same time. Basically those three threads were the battlegrounds.

 

But maybe we've got it wrong and Lou is right. Pap said the Boston Bomb was a false flag, we all said we disagreed and he was, indeed, "fine with it". That's what happened.

 

Stop talking about this now. Poor old pap simply cannot defend himself

[Coxford_lou]

 

But maybe we've got it wrong and Lou is right. Pap said the Boston Bomb was a false flag, we all said we disagreed and he was, indeed, "fine with it". That's what happened.

 

Well, to be honest CB Fry, I'm completely confused about the rules of engagement on here (and probably with men in general). One minute it's defending 'get your tits out for the lads' blokey banter with the 'it's just a joke' mentality. The next it's full on macho all out war. The next someone is banned for a comic strip. All very confusing.

 

The only thing I feel I can depend on....the only certainty I can rely on...is that if someone mentions "Lou" in a post, Hypo will always respond. Like an automated troll-bot. It keeps me sane.

[hypochondriac]

It's really odd how you think I reply to something simply because you do. If you haven't noticed, I've got a number of posts on here and many of them are from conversations in the off topic forums. You happen to post on there a lot and occasionally I'll reply to some of what you say. I comment on a lot of people's posts. You aren't special. Oh and clearly pap wasn't banned for a comic strip. Cute if you truly believe that

[Coxford_lou]

It worked!

[CB Fry]

Well, to be honest CB Fry, I'm completely confused about the rules of engagement on here (and probably with men in general). One minute it's defending 'get your tits out for the lads' blokey banter with the 'it's just a joke' mentality. The next it's full on macho all out war. The next someone is banned for a comic strip. All very confusing.

 

The only thing I feel I can depend on....the only certainty I can rely on...is that if someone mentions "Lou" in a post, Hypo will always respond. Like an automated troll-bot. It keeps me sane.

 

Dunno to all that, really. Personally I avoid the sexism stuff, and I think my record as a libertarian/feminist stands up on this forum and I'd hope you'd agree with that, toots. Your existence certainly has changed the dynamic somewhat, your unique quality of being a female and everything has brought more to the forum than I guess you were expecting.

 

I have no idea why yer man was banned but he can be unhinged, and he has done some pretty loopy things around people's indentity, jobs and life and I doubt Steve banned him for nothing.

 

He's a proven loon/obsessive regarding people's indentities and I wouldn't trust him with anything about me as a person which is why I took time out to create a complete false name and email to sign up to his site as I would gave no doubt he'd be trawling LinkedIn and anywhere else to find stuff on me. On reflection signing up at all was an error.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if his banning was something related to people's private life and Steve said enough is enough.

 

It is a shame. Over recent months we were rubbing along fine especially as we're are close-ish politically, and he is/was good value.

 

I miss Bearsy, so the boys done well there to get him over there, but hey ho.

[Coxford_lou]

Dunno to all that, really. Personally I avoid the sexism stuff, and I think my record as a libertarian/feminist stands up on this forum and I'd hope you'd agree with that, toots.

Yeah, totally!

 

Your existence certainly has changed the dynamic somewhat, your unique quality of being a female and everything has brought more to the forum than I guess you were expecting.

Just slightly

 

I have no idea why yer man was banned but he can be unhinged, and he has done some pretty loopy things around people's indentity, jobs and life and I doubt Steve banned him for nothing.

 

It is a shame. Over recent months we were rubbing along fine especially as we're are close-ish politically, and he is/was good value.

 

Maybe, maybe not. Who knows. I need to extricate myself from these conversations though. Reevaluate my life strategy in terms of football forums...

 

Rock on, CB Fry!

[Smirking_Saint]

Yes, very well put Bletch.

 

The thing with Pap is, if you don't agree with him, you can just tell him, and he's fine with it.

 

Well.... In a sometimes he'll go a bit overboard and sometimes will go far over the top sort of way yes.

 

But generally I like him, I dont agree with the conspiracist stuff, but the world takes all sorts. We have had a few ding dongs, but meh, this place needs a ding dong or two from time to time.

[Smirking_Saint]

It worked!

 

This made me lol