Ayup Site Admin

What's the difference between Hemsworth bairning at Bobby/Steele and Conan with McNulty and Dawson?

 

Or a certain poster spouting bigotry and sectarianism?

 

Because he doesn't feel the need to bring it up in every thread, even where it isn't relevant?

One is an opinion the other has almost got the poster in legal trouble...

 

He goes on about 'McNumpty' an awful lot then...


And I seem to recall an apology about the Hassell comments that went too far. Don't think he was banned for that...

 

why is it suddenly a problem to have an opinion of players? Conan just stated point of view on a player's perceived limitations. If you can't post stuff like that a forum becomes a bit pointless, you may as well just be a group on facebook or summat

 

Agree entirely.

 

But then he has continued in the same vein continually.

Personally I wouldn't ban him. But neither would I prevent opinions that depart from the majority either.

He's not the only one to mention or use McNumpty though.

Personally I don't rate certain players but won't post such things any more, it's just not worth it.

 

Ones legible.

 

The only difference I see us one doesn't rate Bobby Hassell. Which us where all the stick came from.

And dunt be so dramatic not posting opinions. I still think Kelvin's *****.

 

The West Yorkshire poster isn't banned.

Think the decision was due to an accumulation of persistent comments that he was warned about on numerous occasions but refused to acknowledge.

 

It's not worth posting a negative opinion about a player.

I think the difference is that HT manages to bring digs about Steele and Bobby into many often unrelated threads.

 

The only difference that I see is that Conan slates McNulty in relevent threads whereas HT slates Hassell and Steele in completely random threads which are nothing to do with them. England win at cricket and he uses a thread about it to have a go at Hassell and Steele, somebody signs for Barcelona and he uses it to have a go at them, Mellon has a dig at O'Brien and HT uses it to slate Hassell and refuses to accept that he got it wrong and Mellon was talking to someone else.

That's the difference, both are slating our players but one does it in threads about our games, the other does it in threads about which way to wire a plug.

 

That's clearly not the only difference. Gally is in a tricky situation because he doesn't want to come across as draconian, banning people left, right and centre, but on the other hand, many people have told him they no longer use the forum because of one particular contributor. How long do you continue to respect the rights of one individual when what he does is destroying the harmony of the forum as a whole? At best Hemsworth's style of posting is different, at worst it's: provocative beyond the point that should he speak like that face to face he would get a punch in the mouth from the most mild mannered of people, slanderous, and so annoying that the last thing you want to do is log on to the BBS.

Would I ban Hemsworth? Absolutely not, because there's no way on earth I'd get myself in to a position where I'd have to make that decision. Running a forum like this seems like a nightmare to me, particularly when every decision ever made is questioned, ridiculed and shat upon. I'm as guilty of doing that as anyone.

 

You can talk to Conan, you can't talk to Hemsworth

 

I understand the difficult position they're in. I suppose I just can't grasp that people don't post on herr because of him. There's loads of people on here who I think they talk rubbish and I often disagree with em. Difference is I take em with a pinch of salt and ignore em.

I've said it before but some folk deliberately and knowingly went out of their way to wind him up knowing the response they'd get and then bairned about it.

Both as bad as each other.

Dunt matter like, just think it's a slippery slope when you stop someone posting because people don't like him.

 

There were definitely people who followed him around and jumped on everything he said. That was a problem in itself. But if you remove Hemsworth, you remove that problem. Maybe that's not the best solution, but it is a solution, maybe the easiest, and that's probably why Gally went for it.

I don't know what the right thing to do is. Well, I personally believe the best thing to do is just ignore him, but clearly, that wasn't happening.

 

He has been discussed to the hilt.

Can we move on now.

 

Or you could just laugh at both of 'em...

 

Glad your still thinking About me . Maybe site admin agree with my comments.

That's something for you to chew on you sad old man