Personally i don't want to get involved in whether an indiviual should be banned or not, i thought htis site was for general football talk and mainly BFC? However when i read people complaing becasue stuff appears on the BFC site with regards what has been put on this site, all i'm seeing is response to our grumbles? So what if the site is monitored, is that the be all and end all? People talk about us and them as if they were from another country at war against each other? We have nothing to hide and if we did we would not post it on here? i just find it a little far fetched thats all, and face it most web sites are monitored now anyway!
Well said, mate In fact I think it's a good thing that someone's watching us... Hopefully that means no more made-up false rumours and "official statents" from Gordon Shepherd imposters.
you really think that is all that happens? rob simply checks on this site so that he can then correct any inacurracys (Cant spell) using the official site?</p>
Speaking of that post What was made up? Did Mr Shepherd not want to wish Paul Reid a speedy recovery. Of course he did. Did he not want the fans at the Donny game to behave? Of course he did. Were we not watching a premiership centre half? We've signed one. What exactly was made up? And remember, the person who posted the article did not claim to be Mr Shepherd himself.
RE: you really think that is all that happens? Sorry mate I normally agree with most of what you say, but what can they do to intimidate you ? They are not the Corleone family.
RE: you really think that is all that happens? Rob Knowles got me sacked. I'll repeat this again and again and again ad nauseum. This site is being watched in order that action can be taken against people that BFC feel have stepped out of line. No more, no less.
RE: you really think that is all that happens? Are you suggesting that Rob traced your IP and then reported you to your employer? I'd be amazed if that was the case ... not to mention a little disillusioned
I think that neutrino is right on this one He has posted before what happened and he'd have no reason to make it up
It's just like 1984/85 all over again, when certain striking miners had their phone's tapped and you and your mates, didn't mention the next days plans, if a stranger walked in your local. (lookout) ff
From what someone at Orange / Ananova told me. It wasn't the first time you published embargo'd information. Sorry if this isn't true, just what I was told.
No I'm not saying that I think that the action was correct only that if it wasn't the first time some blame should perhaps be laid closer to home.
why should it? i'm sure neutrino accepts that he did wrong by posting it but that didnt mean that he had to report him. he could have chose to keep his nose out of someboy elses business
I agree with what you are saying about keeping his nose out but perhaps if you've already been repremanded for something its unwise to do it again?