|
|
Post by impact on Dec 21, 2021 15:40:50 GMT 1
See my last post. Here's a couple more for you - homophobia and racism in football - allowed to discuss it or not? We have discussed this as an admin team. It's an inexact science, but our take would be that when the discussion moves from being predominantly about the issues and their impact on football and more about the rights and wrongs of the issues generally, then we'll shut the conversation down. An example would be the covid thread about accessing football grounds - once this became (predictably) about covid generally and football was no longer the driver for the conversation, it was shut down. In the summer I started a thread about racism in football after the Euros and the abuse received by England's BAME players. This, again predictably, descended into a pretty unpleasant debate about how it wasn't an issue, BLM, racism generally etc. and football was no longer really being discussed. Hypothetical: the rainbow laces campaign recently seen - if a thread was started discussing this, and homophobia specifically within football, we'd watch with interest. If this (as I predict it would) descended into debates about LGBT rights generally, transgender rights and so on, and football ceased to be at the centre, we'd shut it down. So they key message is, keep things polite, friendly and football-focused and actually a hell of a lot of "life" - social issues, politics etc. can be discussed. Surely the whole point of the rainbow laces campaign is to raise awareness and start discussions about LGBT rights generally? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 15:46:18 GMT 1
We have discussed this as an admin team. It's an inexact science, but our take would be that when the discussion moves from being predominantly about the issues and their impact on football and more about the rights and wrongs of the issues generally, then we'll shut the conversation down. An example would be the covid thread about accessing football grounds - once this became (predictably) about covid generally and football was no longer the driver for the conversation, it was shut down. In the summer I started a thread about racism in football after the Euros and the abuse received by England's BAME players. This, again predictably, descended into a pretty unpleasant debate about how it wasn't an issue, BLM, racism generally etc. and football was no longer really being discussed. Hypothetical: the rainbow laces campaign recently seen - if a thread was started discussing this, and homophobia specifically within football, we'd watch with interest. If this (as I predict it would) descended into debates about LGBT rights generally, transgender rights and so on, and football ceased to be at the centre, we'd shut it down. So they key message is, keep things polite, friendly and football-focused and actually a hell of a lot of "life" - social issues, politics etc. can be discussed. Surely the whole point of the rainbow laces campaign is to raise awareness and start discussions about LGBT rights generally? Indeed. Dealing with homophobes/racist bigots who can't help themselves appropriately would surely allow people to continue to discuss important issues such as racism and homophobia in football without limit. If we can't discuss these issues, for one thing, it makes minority players/fans, etc. invisible. But then - a lot of people will like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Essex Terrier on Dec 21, 2021 15:59:21 GMT 1
Moan, moan, moan....
|
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 16:03:40 GMT 1
Ok, here goes, I'll do my best. answers in bold after each answerable point. Clearly some new rules are needed - otherwise it makes you (all) look like the administrator of a certain other forum - taking action at will, based purely on personal preference, rather than applying rules. Disagree. I think we just need to enforce the current rules consistently and openly. At the weekend, we didn't do this as well as we usually do, with mitigating circumstances already covered. Confident t won't happen again. I'm assuming that the official reasons given for the board's removal do not entirely cover your reasoning - perhaps there are others too. I'm not being conspiratorial here, merely suggesting that the extremely personal heat/hatred directed at certain people on here from another place might have played into your reasoning too. The return of a permanently banned poster, who can't help but say outrageous things can't have helped either. It was a bit like inviting Katie Hopkins on board, and assuming she wouldn't say anything outrageous. This was something that was, I think, inevitable. This is not Oti's fault. He has views I find unpalatable, sure, but then I bear some responsibility for responding robustly and directly. There are other posters whose views/conduct has also been problematic. Whatever my views abut Oti, it would be wrong to lay the responsibility for this change solely at his feet. And rest assured, if we simply wanted to silence him, we would have banned him again. We could certainly have justified it. I do object to your description of a "handful of posters agitating for this". If you want to slyly maintain that most people are happy for the board to be removed - why not move my poll on the issue to the main board, and see if when the voting gets to the hundreds, that the results imply that the 'silent majority' is on your side. You may notice that those who are vocally unhappy with the board's removal, by and large, are those who contributed to it. Hardly a shock that when something gets removed/withdrawn, those who used it are the ones who complain the most. Not trying to slyly maintain anything, was simply referring to those who have acted a certain way since the change - starting poor quality threads repeatedly, either to solely sling muck our way or transparent threads pertaining to be about one thing but clearly being about politics. There are some who have voiced their discontent contstructively and maturely, too, and plenty who have expressed either no view or have expressed empathy and/or support. Surely the answer to "venomous, vitriolic and potentially legally actionable conduct" is to ban the relevant posters. Rather than hold everyone responsible, and start moving (effectively deleting) threads at the bat of an eyelid. As stated in my post, we had this option but for a few reasons rejected it - the last ban issued for conduct on that board resulted in a schism, a breakaway board with entire threads dedicated to insulting members of this board, doxxing, threats of violence and threats of legal action. Therefore we did some research, realised that only one of the 24 championship clubs had a politics board that was as unpleasant as ours, and most didn't have them at all, and so took what we felt was the difficult but right choice. I could be persuaded that perhaps a selective membership approach would work, but the conduct of some over the past week or so has made me less inclined to think this could work. In reality I suspect this to would become a stick to beat us with e.g. "why has X been allowed to join but Y hasn't? Fascists!"I also don't think it'd stopped being predominantly a fans' forum. Surely most the posts were still on TOTT. Will you be removing the mental health board for similar reasons? Isn't it a good thing to encourage political discussion between people who share a non-political (supporting a football club) property in common? Surely it offers the rare chance to allow discourse in a non-echo-chamber (unlike the other place). I'm sympathetic to this view. Very. But would only opt to bring anything back in the future (and not the immediate future) if we could be sure that it would be something that could be a positive space. It was anything but. Like so many things in current society, the tribal nature of the sub-board had become so entrenched it became no longer viable. Currently, my belief is that if the board were reinstated within a week we'd have the same old debates with the same old unpleasantness and the same old issues. And yes, I played a part in it becoming what it was. I'd also urge that if you find administrating the site too much - you could invite some new people on board. Admin decisions have seemed very arbitrary lately - like the actions of a pub landlord who can do what he wants, rather than representative fans who are governing the board on behalf of everyone else. I don't find it too much, but can't speak for Ken or Rig (despite many thinking I am some kind of puppet-master!). This decision wasn't about workload. We have, in recent months, increased the admin team by 50%. I agree some of our decisions could have been more clearly communicated. We'll work on that. As stated earlier, my hope is things will settle down. I'd love to be able to log on and just discuss why I think Danny Ward is overrated or why Carlos should leave the club. Contrary to popular belief, we admins don't spend time plotting together, devising schemes to piss you all off. We are, generally, reactive to issues. We'd rather have no "in box" of issues to deal with. Hopefully, soon, we will be in that place and we'll only have reports of posts from inebriated users on match days etc. One final thing - I'm not expecting you to provide a comprehensive definition of 'politics' - clearly it's as blurry a concept as any. But - can you at least make clear that some political issues, say bearing on football can be discussed? And does the ban extend to current events too, or not? If some disaster happens, can we discuss it? When an election comes round, is it forbidden to mention it? A bit of clarity would help, and would make your decisions seem less arbitrary. Think I've covered this elsewhere.Cheers p.s. can you at least leave the politics board on here as an archive? Perhaps apart from the most outrageous threads. There were some interesting discussions that now only the admins are privy to. We'll consider it. Ken is away atm - if you don't hear anything in the next week or so remind me. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 16:04:55 GMT 1
Surely the whole point of the rainbow laces campaign is to raise awareness and start discussions about LGBT rights generally? Indeed. Dealing with homophobes/racist bigots who can't help themselves appropriately would surely allow people to continue to discuss important issues such as racism and homophobia in football without limit. If we can't discuss these issues, for one thing, it makes minority players/fans, etc. invisible. But then - a lot of people will like that. Agreed. But we all know that very quickly the conversation would descend and football would be forgotten. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 16:15:13 GMT 1
Ok, here goes, I'll do my best. answers in bold after each answerable point. Clearly some new rules are needed - otherwise it makes you (all) look like the administrator of a certain other forum - taking action at will, based purely on personal preference, rather than applying rules. Disagree. I think we just need to enforce the current rules consistently and openly. At the weekend, we didn't do this as well as we usually do, with mitigating circumstances already covered. Confident t won't happen again. I'm assuming that the official reasons given for the board's removal do not entirely cover your reasoning - perhaps there are others too. I'm not being conspiratorial here, merely suggesting that the extremely personal heat/hatred directed at certain people on here from another place might have played into your reasoning too. The return of a permanently banned poster, who can't help but say outrageous things can't have helped either. It was a bit like inviting Katie Hopkins on board, and assuming she wouldn't say anything outrageous. This was something that was, I think, inevitable. This is not Oti's fault. He has views I find unpalatable, sure, but then I bear some responsibility for responding robustly and directly. There are other posters whose views/conduct has also been problematic. Whatever my views abut Oti, it would be wrong to lay the responsibility for this change solely at his feet. And rest assured, if we simply wanted to silence him, we would have banned him again. We could certainly have justified it. I do object to your description of a "handful of posters agitating for this". If you want to slyly maintain that most people are happy for the board to be removed - why not move my poll on the issue to the main board, and see if when the voting gets to the hundreds, that the results imply that the 'silent majority' is on your side. You may notice that those who are vocally unhappy with the board's removal, by and large, are those who contributed to it. Hardly a shock that when something gets removed/withdrawn, those who used it are the ones who complain the most. Not trying to slyly maintain anything, was simply referring to those who have acted a certain way since the change - starting poor quality threads repeatedly, either to solely sling muck our way or transparent threads pertaining to be about one thing but clearly being about politics. There are some who have voiced their discontent contstructively and maturely, too, and plenty who have expressed either no view or have expressed empathy and/or support. Surely the answer to "venomous, vitriolic and potentially legally actionable conduct" is to ban the relevant posters. Rather than hold everyone responsible, and start moving (effectively deleting) threads at the bat of an eyelid. As stated in my post, we had this option but for a few reasons rejected it - the last ban issued for conduct on that board resulted in a schism, a breakaway board with entire threads dedicated to insulting members of this board, doxxing, threats of violence and threats of legal action. Therefore we did some research, realised that only one of the 24 championship clubs had a politics board that was as unpleasant as ours, and most didn't have them at all, and so took what we felt was the difficult but right choice. I could be persuaded that perhaps a selective membership approach would work, but the conduct of some over the past week or so has made me less inclined to think this could work. In reality I suspect this to would become a stick to beat us with e.g. "why has X been allowed to join but Y hasn't? Fascists!"I also don't think it'd stopped being predominantly a fans' forum. Surely most the posts were still on TOTT. Will you be removing the mental health board for similar reasons? Isn't it a good thing to encourage political discussion between people who share a non-political (supporting a football club) property in common? Surely it offers the rare chance to allow discourse in a non-echo-chamber (unlike the other place). I'm sympathetic to this view. Very. But would only opt to bring anything back in the future (and not the immediate future) if we could be sure that it would be something that could be a positive space. It was anything but. Like so many things in current society, the tribal nature of the sub-board had become so entrenched it became no longer viable. Currently, my belief is that if the board were reinstated within a week we'd have the same old debates with the same old unpleasantness and the same old issues. And yes, I played a part in it becoming what it was. I'd also urge that if you find administrating the site too much - you could invite some new people on board. Admin decisions have seemed very arbitrary lately - like the actions of a pub landlord who can do what he wants, rather than representative fans who are governing the board on behalf of everyone else. I don't find it too much, but can't speak for Ken or Rig (despite many thinking I am some kind of puppet-master!). This decision wasn't about workload. We have, in recent months, increased the admin team by 50%. I agree some of our decisions could have been more clearly communicated. We'll work on that. As stated earlier, my hope is things will settle down. I'd love to be able to log on and just discuss why I think Danny Ward is overrated or why Carlos should leave the club. Contrary to popular belief, we admins don't spend time plotting together, devising schemes to piss you all off. We are, generally, reactive to issues. We'd rather have no "in box" of issues to deal with. Hopefully, soon, we will be in that place and we'll only have reports of posts from inebriated users on match days etc. One final thing - I'm not expecting you to provide a comprehensive definition of 'politics' - clearly it's as blurry a concept as any. But - can you at least make clear that some political issues, say bearing on football can be discussed? And does the ban extend to current events too, or not? If some disaster happens, can we discuss it? When an election comes round, is it forbidden to mention it? A bit of clarity would help, and would make your decisions seem less arbitrary. Think I've covered this elsewhere.Cheers p.s. can you at least leave the politics board on here as an archive? Perhaps apart from the most outrageous threads. There were some interesting discussions that now only the admins are privy to. We'll consider it. Ken is away atm - if you don't hear anything in the next week or so remind me. Okay, thanks. I still think it's a shame, and I'll definitely be spending a fraction of the time on here that I used to, as I'm sure will many others. I hope there's a loosening on the banned subjects in future. And a tip - you'll presumably want to update the Off Topic slogan: 'anything non-football can be discussed in here'. |
|
Macduff
Andy Booth Terrier
I've got a Gibson without a case but I cant get that even tanned look on my face.
Posts: 3,922
|
Post by Macduff on Dec 21, 2021 16:40:27 GMT 1
How can you possibly discuss racism in football and homophobia in football without touching on racism and homophobia in society? If we hear racist remarks by fans outside the ground, seems like that would apparently cross the line for comment. While the principles might be fine to lay out, it's going to be a complete dogs dinner to admin. When the next (but hopefully never) tragedy happens in the channel, is that a forbidden topic?
I guess if we stick to pure football and arse wiping that will keep everyone happy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 16:43:30 GMT 1
How can you possibly discuss racism in football and homophobia in football without touching on racism and homophobia in society? If we hear racist remarks by fans outside the ground, seems like that would apparently cross the line for comment. While the principles might be fine to lay out, it's going to be a complete dogs dinner to admin. When the next (but hopefully never) tragedy happens in the channel, is that a forbidden topic? I guess if we stick to pure football and arse wiping that will keep everyone happy? We haven't said "without touching on", though, have we? What we've said is that when the conversation has left football behind and is just about the politics it will get closed down. So, keep it football-centric and it'll be fine. |
|
Macduff
Andy Booth Terrier
I've got a Gibson without a case but I cant get that even tanned look on my face.
Posts: 3,922
|
Post by Macduff on Dec 21, 2021 16:59:52 GMT 1
But what tends to happen is you get parallel conversations on the same thread, with one straying from the topic. I would hope a warning would be issued prior to any shut down.
|
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Dec 21, 2021 17:01:46 GMT 1
It's a bit like shutting the school cos the thick kids were annoying the swots.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 17:03:37 GMT 1
It's a bit like shutting the school cos the thick kids were annoying the swots and then one of the thick kids opening a school just for the other thick kids? A safe place for them to smear shit on the windows and sniff pritt sticks? Yeah, your analogy is valid. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 17:04:26 GMT 1
But what tends to happen is you get parallel conversations on the same thread, with one straying from the topic. I would hope a warning would be issued prior to any shut down. Sure - it may be that specific posts get removed etc. We'll work on making it as visible/transparent as possible. |
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Dec 21, 2021 17:12:19 GMT 1
It's a bit like shutting the school cos the thick kids were annoying the swots and then one of the thick kids opening a school just for the other thick kids? A safe place for them to smear shit on the windows and sniff pritt sticks? Yeah, your analogy is valid. You've just crystallized why you have had to shut down a massive part of your forum. Well done. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 17:16:17 GMT 1
But what tends to happen is you get parallel conversations on the same thread, with one straying from the topic. I would hope a warning would be issued prior to any shut down. etc. We'll work on making it as visible/transparent as possible. That would surely be much better than shutting down important and relevant discussions (in terms of political discussions in general, if you ask me! But at least when relevant to football), i.e. collective punishment. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 17:17:18 GMT 1
and then one of the thick kids opening a school just for the other thick kids? A safe place for them to smear shit on the windows and sniff pritt sticks? Yeah, your analogy is valid. You've just crystallized why you have had to shut down a massive part of your forum. Well done. Other forums are available. Apparently the admins there do so with a light touch. Or maybe not. |
|
|
|
Post by sensible idiot on Dec 21, 2021 17:48:49 GMT 1
You've just crystallized why you have had to shut down a massive part of your forum. Well done. Other forums are available. Apparently the admins there do so with a light touch. Or maybe not. The thing is, a lot of folk probably did the same as I did - had a look when it started and thought ‘hmmm, not for me’. You see I don’t want a politics board where folk spew offensive stuff… and in the main the deleted one was fine. Of course there were opinions I thought distasteful… And posters who were offensive. But my view is that if the admins used the rules and applied sanctions (and life bans etc meant life bans)… then while it may have been heated it wouldn’t have broken any laws or forum rules. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 18:06:00 GMT 1
Other forums are available. Apparently the admins there do so with a light touch. Or maybe not. The thing is, a lot of folk probably did the same as I did - had a look when it started and thought ‘hmmm, not for me’. You see I don’t want a politics board where folk spew offensive stuff… and in the main the deleted one was fine. Of course there were opinions I thought distasteful… And posters who were offensive. But my view is that if the admins used the rules and applied sanctions (and life bans etc meant life bans)… then while it may have been heated it wouldn’t have broken any laws or forum rules.Surely there's a lesson in this - to do with a baby and the bathwater. |
|
digs
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,130
|
Post by digs on Dec 21, 2021 18:12:42 GMT 1
How can you possibly discuss racism in football and homophobia in football without touching on racism and homophobia in society? If we hear racist remarks by fans outside the ground, seems like that would apparently cross the line for comment. While the principles might be fine to lay out, it's going to be a complete dogs dinner to admin. When the next (but hopefully never) tragedy happens in the channel, is that a forbidden topic? I guess if we stick to pure football and arse wiping that will keep everyone happy? We haven't said "without touching on", though, have we? What we've said is that when the conversation has left football behind and is just about the politics it will get closed down. So, keep it football-centric and it'll be fine. If your so afraid of what might happen on the forum if people talk politics ect,then why do you carry on as Admin,why don't you go back to just posting instead?,or do you like to be in charge of things and show your face every where,does it help your career? I'm not just having a pop,I'm just interested to know if you like the attention. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 18:13:45 GMT 1
Other forums are available. Apparently the admins there do so with a light touch. Or maybe not. The thing is, a lot of folk probably did the same as I did - had a look when it started and thought ‘hmmm, not for me’. You see I don’t want a politics board where folk spew offensive stuff… and in the main the deleted one was fine. Of course there were opinions I thought distasteful… And posters who were offensive. But my view is that if the admins used the rules and applied sanctions (and life bans etc meant life bans)… then while it may have been heated it wouldn’t have broken any laws or forum rules. There has only ever been one life ban rescinded. It was done so as a gesture of goodwill/act of sympathy for someone apparently rapidly approaching the end of their life. That they chose to swiftly return to similar behaviours to those that saw them banned is not on us. And the fall out from their original ban, specifically some of the disgusting behaviour from a significant few, suggests that the application of sanctions and life bans could cause more problems than it solves. Let's face it, while Oti's return hasn't solely caused this move by us, had people behaved differently at the time of his ban then perhaps we would not be having this conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by Gag_N_Bone_Man (Destabiliser) on Dec 21, 2021 18:21:54 GMT 1
We haven't said "without touching on", though, have we? What we've said is that when the conversation has left football behind and is just about the politics it will get closed down. So, keep it football-centric and it'll be fine. If your so afraid of what might happen on the forum if people talk politics ect,then why do you carry on as Admin,why don't you go back to just posting instead?,or do you like to be in charge of things and show your face every where,does it help your career? I'm not just having a pop,I'm just interested to know if you like the attention. how in fuck's name would it help my career? Genuinely? Do you think comedy promoters seriously say "I wasn't going to book you, but I saw that you banned a rancid old homophobe on a Huddersfield Town forum, my venue in Liverpool will really dig that, have a gig"? Jesus, I even heard that over on the other forum it is gospel that the decision to remove the sub-board was mine, and mine alone, and was made because I'm sanitising my social media history for impending TV fame. That was funnier than any joke I have ever written or could ever write. Do I like to be in charge? Not especially. It's often more hassle than it's worth. When you receive messages from former admins asking why you still do it, it gives you pause, for sure. But I genuinely believe we administer the site selflessly and with the best of intentions. Always. Do we always get it right? Of course not. Nobody does, can or would. I miss the politics board. Genuinely. But I still think we did the right thing. If you want to discuss politics, we're not stopping you - plenty of places to do it. But you wouldn't expect to discuss politics on a cricket forum, or a Strictly Come Dancing fans forum, or any comparable site. If it were likely we could bring it back without the same shit show happening as before I'd push for us to do it in a heartbeat. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 18:25:42 GMT 1
The thing is, a lot of folk probably did the same as I did - had a look when it started and thought ‘hmmm, not for me’. You see I don’t want a politics board where folk spew offensive stuff… and in the main the deleted one was fine. Of course there were opinions I thought distasteful… And posters who were offensive. But my view is that if the admins used the rules and applied sanctions (and life bans etc meant life bans)… then while it may have been heated it wouldn’t have broken any laws or forum rules. It was done so as a gesture of goodwill/act of sympathy for someone apparently rapidly approaching the end of their life. That they chose to swiftly return to similar behaviours to those that saw them banned is not on us. And the fall out from their original ban, specifically some of the disgusting behaviour from a significant few, suggests that the application of sanctions and life bans could cause more problems than it solves. Let's face it, while Oti's return hasn't solely caused this move by us, had people behaved differently at the time of his ban then perhaps we would not be having this conversation. I'm sorry - but that one is on you. You knew he'd post hateful shit again, and he did. It was utterly predictable - you knew it when you unbanned him. |
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Dec 21, 2021 18:27:21 GMT 1
There has only ever been one life ban rescinded. It was done so as a gesture of goodwill/act of sympathy for someone apparently rapidly approaching the end of their life. That they chose to swiftly return to similar behaviours to those that saw them banned is not on us. And the fall out from their original ban, specifically some of the disgusting behaviour from a significant few, suggests that the application of sanctions and life bans could cause more problems than it solves. Let's face it, while Oti's return hasn't solely caused this move by us, had people behaved differently at the time of his ban then perhaps we would not be having this conversation. I'm sorry - but that one is on you. You knew he'd post hateful shit again, and he did. It was utterly predictable - you knew it when you unbanned him. And then locked horns, which didn't help at all..... |
|
digs
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,130
|
Post by digs on Dec 21, 2021 18:28:10 GMT 1
If your so afraid of what might happen on the forum if people talk politics ect,then why do you carry on as Admin,why don't you go back to just posting instead?,or do you like to be in charge of things and show your face every where,does it help your career? I'm not just having a pop,I'm just interested to know if you like the attention. how in fuck's name would it help my career? Genuinely? Do you think comedy promoters seriously say "I wasn't going to book you, but I saw that you banned a rancid old homophobe on a Huddersfield Town forum, my venue in Liverpool will really dig that, have a gig"? Jesus, I even heard that over on the other forum it is gospel that the decision to remove the sub-board was mine, and mine alone, and was made because I'm sanitising my social media history for impending TV fame. That was funnier than any joke I have ever written or could ever write. Do I like to be in charge? Not especially. It's often more hassle than it's worth. When you receive messages from former admins asking why you still do it, it gives you pause, for sure. But I genuinely believe we administer the site selflessly and with the best of intentions. Always. Do we always get it right? Of course not. Nobody does, can or would. I miss the politics board. Genuinely. But I still think we did the right thing. If you want to discuss politics, we're not stopping you - plenty of places to do it. But you wouldn't expect to discuss politics on a cricket forum, or a Strictly Come Dancing fans forum, or any comparable site. If it were likely we could bring it back without the same shit show happening as before I'd push for us to do it in a heartbeat. So why do you have the need to use a photo of you on stage as your avatar,and change your name to your Gag n bone,,what's wrong with original name? it can look a bit like the action of a media Whore |
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Dec 21, 2021 18:28:37 GMT 1
Anyway, can somebody go and shut down that thread about NFT's in football before it turns into a discussion about the Big Reset
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 18:52:27 GMT 1
I'm sorry - but that one is on you. You knew he'd post hateful shit again, and he did. It was utterly predictable - you knew it when you unbanned him. And then locked horns, which didn't help at all..... Much better than what passes for conversation on your forum, Mel. I don't think your recruitment drive is going well. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 18:54:29 GMT 1
Anyway, can somebody go and shut down that thread about NFT's in football before it turns into a discussion about the Big Reset Seems all that sun and sangria has dulled both your wits and your wit - for whatever that's worth. |
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Dec 21, 2021 19:02:24 GMT 1
Anyway, can somebody go and shut down that thread about NFT's in football before it turns into a discussion about the Big Reset Seems all that sun and sangria has dulled both your wits and your wit - for whatever that's worth. Coming from you, utterly worthless. |
|
|
|
Post by El Mel on Dec 21, 2021 19:05:37 GMT 1
And then locked horns, which didn't help at all..... Much better than what passes for conversation on your forum, Mel. I don't think your recruitment drive is going well. One minute you're complaining about the lack of political discussion, and then decrying the place where it's actively taking place. Maybe you just want political discussion on your terms, I don't know, but it's there for you if you want it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 19:06:49 GMT 1
Much better than what passes for conversation on your forum, Mel. I don't think your recruitment drive is going well. One minute you're complaining about the lack of political discussion, and then decrying the place where it's actively taking place. Maybe you just want political discussion on your terms, I don't know, but it's there for you if you want it. Link me to a thread involving political debate. Great chance to advertise your forum. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2021 19:09:43 GMT 1
Seems all that sun and sangria has dulled both your wits and your wit - for whatever that's worth. Coming from you, utterly worthless. I think there's a village missing an idiot. If you can call a forum on the Internet a village. Ducking out now, nobody wants petty squabbles taking up their bandwidth. |
|
