Black and Gold revelations

[melv]

I don't think he has

 

Not very good at thinking are you.

[Erniemossrules]

Never doubted it for a moment... it seems B&G are handling the situation well.

 

Like others my curiosity levels are rising..... I'm old so patients is the only virtue I have left.

 

Yes they must publicise it to any new possible owners that the supporters will not support any buyer who does not purchase the ground.Can they only afford 2.7 million to buy the club?

We will not be held to ransom by that evil tyrant any longer and allow him to get away with keeping the ground.

Any new owner must realise that they need to keep the supporters happy or else they could end up being despised and hated like Smurthwaite.Any losses have been caused by his own incompetence.

Coventry have shown what can happen when the club doesn’t own the ground.

He paid 1.2 million for the club and ground

so can’t be allowed to to walk all over us and play his silly games.

He has already stated that there will be no debts if the club is placed into administration so there is no debtors to pay and the club can be bought cheaply.

I don’t think the Football League will allow him to put the club into administration considering the large Hugill payments he has received in the last 15 months which were actually paid to the football club.

[Doha]

Contrary to his claims the bidder meeting took place in Pyongyang rather than HK, we know because someone on PVO tailed him and got a picture of the meeting.

 

[PVTony]

A bit off topic.

Friends of mine rented a house a few months ago from Smurthwaite, but before agreeing to they asked for some things to be done concerning the property. He agreed to do them.

 

He has not done anything as promised and they are so fed up that they have now left the house to go and live elsewhere.

 

When I found out about this, I thought - typical devious Smurf.

[jimbo57]

Praise the lord.

 

He absolutely kills this forum.

 

 

No, he had a different opinion to 99% of the posters on here. So what?

I rarely visit this site nowadays as it's the same people saying the same things with hardly any debate.

Admittedly I don't know how he had the time to post so much, but that could be said for quite a few on here. The difference is he simply had a different opinion. To ban someone for that in my opinion, is very, very dangerous.

If you don't like what someone says, simply ignore them.

[geosname]

People are not banned for having a different opinion

[Wrex]

A bit off topic.

Friends of mine rented a house a few months ago from Smurthwaite, but before agreeing to they asked for some things to be done concerning the property. He agreed to do them.

 

He has not done anything as promised and they are so fed up that they have now left the house to go and live elsewhere.

 

When I found out about this, I thought - typical devious Smurf.

 

I think it's important that as many ordinary non-Vale fans as possible know what the man is like. Some good can come out of this. We need to spread the word on his true nature. Ring up phone ins, write letters etc

[Wrex]

No, he had a different opinion to 99% of the posters on here. So what?

I rarely visit this site nowadays as it's the same people saying the same things with hardly any debate.

Admittedly I don't know how he had the time to post so much, but that could be said for quite a few on here. The difference is he simply had a different opinion. To ban someone for that in my opinion, is very, very dangerous.

If you don't like what someone says, simply ignore them.

 

Oswald Mosley was jailed during World War II for having a different opinion. Similar situation here as the club faces it's own D-Day it's not appropriate to have some arrogant little twerp saying "don't prod the bear", "yes the Fuhrer maybe said something ill advised but"...

[Jacko51]

No, he had a different opinion to 99% of the posters on here. So what?

I rarely visit this site nowadays as it's the same people saying the same things with hardly any debate.

Admittedly I don't know how he had the time to post so much, but that could be said for quite a few on here. The difference is he simply had a different opinion. To ban someone for that in my opinion, is very, very dangerous.

If you don't like what someone says, simply ignore them.

 

You often have different opinions but you don't get banned, jimbo. I had REP on ignore but it still didn't stop his posts popping up when quoted by others. On occasions I have loaded a thread and found five posts in a row from him all ignored. He spammed a lot of threads and was often extremely childish in some of his responses.

 

He's probably a nice bloke in real life but in front of a keyboard he's a bloody menace. Just my opinion though.

[PVFC86]

I think it's important that as many ordinary non-Vale fans as possible know what the man is like. Some good can come out of this. We need to spread the word on his true nature. Ring up phone ins, write letters etc

Get Melv E-mailing too.

[geosname]

Oswald Mosley was jailed during World War II for having a different opinion. Similar situation here as the club faces it's own D-Day it's not appropriate to have some arrogant little twerp saying "don't prod the bear", "yes the Fuhrer maybe said something ill advised but"...

 

I think it could have been more than a different opinion

[robf]

Just to jump on this...

 

We don't ban people for different opinions but we do ban people if they break our rules and/or ignore admin team advice.

 

I think there can be a misconceptions that the Admin team sit back and let things happen without any concern for the forum.

 

That is NOT the case.

 

There is an awful lot which goes on behind the scenes (and I thank all the team for their time and efforts in this regard).

 

We actively debate among ourselves about the rights and wrongs of banning users and the process often involves a series of private messages to any user warning them to stop their activity or face a ban. Our goal is always to try and get people to get along and respect different opinions. In isolated cases, a ban will come without any communication from us (usually due to an extreme comment) but often a ban only comes about after a number of private conversations where we will try and persuade user teetering on the edge to moderate their behaviour.

 

We don't comment publically on the reasons for anyone being banned but when a ban is applied rest assured it has been through a process where a) the Admin team decide en masse that a ban is appropriate and b) often communication has gone on to resolve the situation privately.

 

Where I think people get annoyed is when someone with a radically different viewpoint is not ejected - but the very ethos of this forum (and for that matter other places such as Facebook, Twitter etc) is to allow reasonable debate. In the case of someone else's views annoying you, we recommend the Ignore button. It won't totally eradicate their posts if people quote them but it will reduce the "noise"...

 

Hope this helps and sorry for going off at a tangent.

 

Rob

[cheshirevaliant]

So basically you said to him "stop being a ****" and he said "but I can't help it"?

[Howjy04]

I think it could have been more than a different opinion

 

Is being called a ‘bum chum’ acceptable,geo?I complained about this last week to admin when I was called this.I see the poster is still posting.New rules in place?

[geosname]

Oswald Mosley was jailed during World War II for having a different opinion. Similar situation here as the club faces it's own D-Day it's not appropriate to have some arrogant little twerp saying "don't prod the bear", "yes the Fuhrer maybe said something ill advised but"...

 

Is being called a ‘bum chum’ acceptable,geo?I complained about this last week to admin when I was called this.I see the poster is still posting.New rules in place?

 

I was referring to the Mosley comment, as quoted above.