A question for admin.

To be fair to whitey it was just one tongue in cheek remark, 99% of the time his posts are about Barnsley football club, The difference being is that 99% of the time cricket Jim's post were trying to get a rise out of folk,

 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/dec/04/tom-daley-gay-people-football

A bit of balance then to show we don't all spend our evenings listening to Jim Davidson DVDs.

 

I don't know if that was addressed towards me, Jay. But here goes:

I wasn't having a go at Whitey. I didn't say his posts were homophobic. All I was trying to do was to see things from CricketJim's point of view in that he clearly took offence at Whitey's post, and things then escalated and the thread became inappropriate in my opinion. I didn't comment on CJ's "murderous scousers" post as it was somewhat ambiguous, but thought the ban was a bit harsh (that's before I knew about the personal abuse and threats via pm's).

I agree wholeheartedly that Admin do a great job for nowt a yard. I would never knowingly give them grief. Being the reasonable people they are, they listened to what a lot of us said about Hemsworth, and allowed him back on the site.

Similarly, I was simply asking Admin to reconsider CJ's ban. I wasn't taking sides or having a go at anyone. I thought CJ had been more reasonable of late, and a lot of other posters on here agreed with me, but I didn't know how bad things had become.

Jay - you are one of the more articulate posters on here and your comments are usually well constructed and argued. I always enjoy reading your posts, as I do Whitey's posts. Furthermore, I always enjoy reading Whitey's blogs and watching the videos he puts together - they're top class. And I have said so on this forum.

 

Hi mate, I wasn't directing the post at you, no. I don't think you said anything wrong in the discussion. It was a general comment on the nature of offence and censorship. I directed it at Dustani, but I wasn't having a go at him, I was simply addressing the issue.

I don't know how to write the following without coming across as patronising, but I hope you believe me when I say that isn't my intention.

CricketJim wasn't offended by what Whitey wrote. It was mock offence with the sole intention of causing trouble. To give him credit, it worked an absolute treat. Whitey was simply his latest victim in his crusade to annoy, abuse and discredit as many people on the BBS as possible.

He's done it to many people. When he did it to me, under the name Greek man, he made a big announcement on the BBS that I had been sending him threatening private messages, that I was bullying him. I'd never even responded to one of his posts, never mind sent him a private message.

If you doubt CricketJim is Greek man then look in the chat box.

Everyone who has defended CricketJim has been duped, because all they've done is defend the right of someone to cause decent members of this forum the maximum hassle possible.

I've got a couple of gay friends. They wouldn't have battered an eyelid at what Whitey wrote. However, they would have been rather distressed by someone belittling the cause of equal rights by pretending to be offended by what amounts to nothing and using such a worthwhile cause to inflict distress on another person. When people read the kind of things that CricketJim wrote they believe gay people are as sensitive as a kitten and are offended by everything. It makes people turn away from the battle for equal rights because of the trivialities of the complaints. The vast majority of gay people aren't so sensitive, they do have a sense of humour and they wouldn't have complained at what Whitey wrote.

 

Yes, Jay, I admit I was duped by CricketJim. I naively thought he was a genuine bloke and I took him (his posts) at face value.

Sorry to hear that you have been on the receiving end of hassle from him.

And no, you weren't patronising.

 

This "mock offence" that Jay mentions happened to me once a few years ago. It was by a well-known (at the time) poster who also received several bans for various reasons including abuse and bullying particularly towards female posters. As far as I know he's not been back since the site was updated, thank God.

It was a Saturday night after a particularly poor home match (which we lost) and someone posted about fireworks being a nuisance and scaring pets etc. Nothing to do with the match itself. I (unwisely perhaps) posted that "we could have done with some fireworks on the pitch". It was clearly a joke, but this poster accused me of inciting hooliganism and criminality. As it happens he got ridiculed by other posters.

I wonder about the types of people who do this sort of thing. Why?

 

God put gays on the earth for the purposes of banter.

If he hadn't he would have sent some sort of plague to get rid of them.

 

He never threatened me via PM. He remarked - every weekend - upon Jacob.
"broke a leg yet?" "how's the greedy lovely person?" "someone should have coined him on Saturday" and many more besides, including digs at my partner, my job, pretty much owt he fancied.
Sad really. But then, I put it out there in the open and so perhaps there's a lesson to be learned. I did though offer to meet him in the No7 pre match but he never showed. Funny that.
I know a few gay people, in fact my cousin is a lesbian, and I know myself that my comments weren't homophobic. Distasteful? Perhaps. Offensive to some? Probably. Cheap laugh material? You bet. I'm a bit of a tit. As anyone who knows me would testify.

 

Aye he had a go or two at me too but I just didn't respond and he moved onto his next target although lumbering himself with a name similar to mine was mildly irritating.

 

Well be careful cos tha can catch gay off people, I know it's true cos it happened to Peter Griffin. Plus nearly all my ex's decided to become lesbians.