forever_blue Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Fucking he'll blue, now I am agreeing with you. Fucks going on? Must be yon winds stoney , the weather does some strange things to people's mind sometimes 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 I hang on your every post.. Waiting..... I would recommend seeking employment as a much more worthwhile project 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Oh you ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Must be yon winds stoney , the weather does some strange things to people's mind sometimes Nah. Just common sense. A mod threatening with the ban hammer because he does not like the topic of conversation on a thread with more micro discussions than threads in the subforum is out of order. If lines are crossed fair enough but it's a wee bit fascist to ban for chatting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Nah. Just common sense. A mod threatening with the ban hammer because he does not like the topic of conversation on a thread with more micro discussions than threads in the subforum is out of order. If lines are crossed fair enough but it's a wee bit fascist to ban for chatting. Completely agree , if you were to delete every post on the bralt which was off topic you would probably have the thread at least halved And the idea that it has became the old firm shit flinging contest is not a new revaluation , it's no coincidence that the decline of the rangers - celtic part of the forum went hand in hand with growing use of the bralt/ rangers sub forum 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Completely agree , if you were to delete every post on the bralt which was off topic you would probably have the thread at least halved And the idea that it has became the old firm shit flinging contest is not a new revaluation , it's no coincidence that the decline of the rangers - celtic part of the forum went hand in hand with growing use of the bralt/ rangers sub forum It's all good. It gives a wee bit of entertainment when the news on Sevco is quiet and it shows what a bunch of roasters Celtic and Sevco have in their support. When the discussions do get serious again it gives we diddies a good idea of the roaster base level in each member and therefore we can easily judge the amount of credence to afford them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Nah. Just common sense. A mod threatening with the ban hammer because he does not like the topic of conversation on a thread with more micro discussions than threads in the subforum is out of order. If lines are crossed fair enough but it's a wee bit fascist to ban for chatting. I always get amused when people who seem to know little about running a forum go the Godwin route. You accepted the rules when you joined, this is not a free country - it's a moderated bit of hard drive space owned/hired by someone else. Calling it fascist would be like someone peering in your window calling you fascist for changing the channel. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Completely agree , if you were to delete every post on the bralt which was off topic you would probably have the thread at least halved And the idea that it has became the old firm shit flinging contest is not a new revaluation , it's no coincidence that the decline of the rangers - celtic part of the forum went hand in hand with growing use of the bralt/ rangers sub forum We'd be up to our knees in deleted posts... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 It's all good. It gives a wee bit of entertainment when the news on Sevco is quiet and it shows what a bunch of roasters Celtic and Sevco have in their support. When the discussions do get serious again it gives we diddies a good idea of the roaster base level in each member and therefore we can easily judge the amount of credence to afford them. Of course , I fail to believe the mods and so on are actually bothered unless a line is truly crossed , a wee bit of faux offence or disgust now and then but they all know a rangers and celtic tit for tat guarantees a few more pages and hits on the big thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 You can ban people for having an off topic debate ? Things were discussed that was a wee bit off track , so what are the grounds of any possible banning based on out of interest? And aye it turned into the old firm mud slinging thread about at least two years ago btw If you think defending sectarian behaviour, particularly by claiming the other side is 'pure worse' is welcome on here then you're very much mistaken. Of course , I fail to believe the mods and so on are actually bothered unless a line is truly crossed , a wee bit of faux offence or disgust now and then but they all know a rangers and celtic tit for tat guarantees a few more pages and hits on the big thread Hits? I can honestly say the number of hits on the forum has never been discussed between the mods or Div in the context of moderating. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 (edited) If you think defending sectarian behaviour, particularly by claiming the other side is 'pure worse' is welcome on here then you're very much mistaken. Hits? I can honestly say the number of hits on the forum has never been discussed between the mods or Div in the context of moderating. I don't defend sectarian behaviour , I already stated its a reminder to our green and grey that if their is a moral pedestal then they are not getting on it , the debate that went on in here last night is nowhere near some of the other guff which gets debated on this site , you had whole threads on the referendum debate based on how one side was worse than the other not that I have any issue with anyone getting involved in a debate about guff which interests them , they shouldbe free to do so until a line is crossed Again if you had such an issue with all the old firm mud slinging on this thread , you would have nipped it in the bud when it first began creeping in rather than numerous years down the line , it's hardly a new revalation Edited January 29, 2016 by forever_blue -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 I don't defend sectarian behaviour , I already stated its a reminder to our green and grey that if their is a moral pedestal then they are not getting on it , the debate that went on in here last night is nowhere near some of the other guff which gets debated on this site , you had whole threads on the referendum debate based on how one side was worse than the other not that I have any issue with anyone getting involved in a debate about guff which interests them , they shouldbe free to do so until a line is crossed Again if you had such an issue with all the old firm mud slinging on this thread , you would have nipped it in the bud when it first began creeping in rather than numerous years down the line , it's hardly a new revalation Do Rangers give out lessons on whataboutery? I, and other mods, have posted on here several times warning posters about their conduct. The problem is, no one listens and we end up with the kind of shite we've seen over the last few days - including the rhyming slang nonsense. Its pathetic and unnecessary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 PAIR OF SECTARIAN FUCKWITS FC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Green QC says sensible decision would be to view "Rangers" the club/company to be one and same as that previously known as Sevco Scotland 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Green QC says sensible decision would be to view "Rangers" the club/company to be one and same as that previously known as Sevco Scotland could you finally have some credible evidence to support your new club nonsense? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 nope the judge ruins it for you again, 3 judges now confirming club and company seperate and the club survived Judge: "let's just assume for sake of discussion the clause means the club and not the company. Why are you so anxious?". Judge asks Green QC "why it is so important" to define the difference between Sevco and "the entity which has existed for over 100 years". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 nope the judge ruins it for you again, 3 judges now confirming club and company seperate and the club survived Judge: "let's just assume for sake of discussion the clause means the club and not the company. Why are you so anxious?". Judge asks Green QC "why it is so important" to define the difference between Sevco and "the entity which has existed for over 100 years". That is confirming nothing. That is asking questions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Green QC says it is of significance to define as Sevco has legal personality, whereas the "club" does not Clubs do not legally exist? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 could you finally have some credible evidence to support your new club nonsense? What member club voted yes to the question whether Sevco should be allowed to become a member club of the SPL? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 29, 2016 Share Posted January 29, 2016 Dewar "No-one knows what the Rangers football club is, but it has no legal personality" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.