Liverpool FC Forum

[GYBS]

What if people cant get over it thou Ace ?

[aCe']

What if people cant get over it thou Ace ?

people who dont get along can just put each other on ignore i guess...

[GYBS]

What happens if its a lot more than just ignoring people Ace and it trancends into your real life ?

[bigmick]

I'm not surprised in the least by the reaction to the original question, if I had been having a bet on the it the response given would have been 10/1 ON. I think it's a shame on a number of levels and I don't agree with it, but I understand why the answer is as is.

Having been on the recieving end of some fairly shall we say near to the mark abuse myself over the years (and I'm in no way shape or form getting involved in a "my abuse was worse than your abuse" contest, as it probably wasn't anyway even if it has been over a significantly more sustained period in my case), I've got a bit of experience in moving on and letting things go. In the heat of the moment, or the witching of the hour people do and say stupid things. Sometimes dare I say it some of us even deserve it, but the memory that it is just a forum at the end of the day normally helps to heal from all sides.

Ultimately, I guess if people want to post badly enough they'll just invent a new name and crack on. I don't even know if the likes of Peewee, Bamaga man, Stu the Red, that Alex bloke etc etc even still read the forum (I genuinely don't, I'm not in PM contact with any of them) but it seems a bit daft to me to ban them under their old name when we have no means whatsoever of stopping them re-registering.

That approach seems to me to be counterproductive on a number of levels. Firstly, when they come back under "Shanks" or whatever their new moniker is, they mooch around for a while contributing very little before they get bored with it, kick off and then get banned again. Alter-ego's do very little for the boards unless it's on a p!ss take level. Also, under a new moniker they are able to hide from the glare of inspection. Far better to let people in and if they are going to behave so demonstrably badly, let the World see them do it under their original name. Also, a poster under his own name carries a history which adds texture. If Peewee mentions Kuyt you know he doesn't rate him, so therefore the majority of his posts on the Dutchman would be on the p!ss take side of the ledger. Similarly you know that Owzat doesn't rate Crouch, so you fill your pockets with salt before you read his opinions on the big man. You know that I am less effusive about the manager than some, so therefore you expect a certain slant.

Ultimately though, just as it was a question I was entitled to ask I think, the mods are entitled to give their answer. Whether or not I like it or agree with it is irrelevent. I simply think that the new rules and the way they are being applied would be robust enough to deal with an newcomers, be they old faces or not.

[Kharhaz]

[GYBS]

As i said what happens when it transcends to more than just a message board and goes into effecting real life mick ?

[tubby]

What happened to Legbarnes?

[bigmick]

Well I've had the occasional threat of that myself GYBS and it isn't pleasant that's for sure. Like I say though, ultimately people do and say some regrettable things in the heat of the moment, particularly if they are incensed at what they percieve to be injustice. It in no way shape of form excuses any alleged behaviour, nor does it adequately explain it, but it is a fact nontheless.

All that doesn't change my point about people re-registering though. We don't and can't fingerprint new members, so there seems to me to be little to be gained by forcing people into the territory of the nom de plume. Keep everyone where you can see them, in the full glare of the spotlight would be the way to go, and rigourously deploy the new rules and guidelines to ALL members on the forum. I know for my own part that was the aspect of the thing which used to annoy me. Some people had carte blanche to abuse anyone in any way they saw fit (with the "anyone" usually being me from what I could see ) whereas others were carded and banned for seemingly feck all.

My argument was never that those having a pop at me should be banned (the forum is far better with them still on, absolutely no doubt about it) but that by banning others the football debate is by definition diminished. It may not have an  impact on the real world or whatever, but I don't do that so obviously that wouldn't really effect me. I like to come on here and talk about football, so if that is impacted then I'm inadvertantly penalised as well.

[JC_81]

Who would you vote to allow back?

I am not sure exactly how many have been banned for life (or who most of them are!) so MY VOTE WOULD HAVE BEEN TO ALLOW THEM ALL BACK.

Of the posters who I think have been banned for life I would have liked to have seen Bamaga man and Stu allowed back. Both add a lot to the football discussion

Agreed mate.

I think both were good for the footy debate on here.  Life bans from a football discussion forum are a bit ridiculous imo, but there you go.

[bigmick]

Who would you vote to allow back?

I am not sure exactly how many have been banned for life (or who most of them are!) so MY VOTE WOULD HAVE BEEN TO ALLOW THEM ALL BACK.

Of the posters who I think have been banned for life I would have liked to have seen Bamaga man and Stu allowed back. Both add a lot to the football discussion

Agreed mate.

I think both were good for the footy debate on here.  Life bans from a football discussion forum are a bit ridiculous imo, but there you go.

And in fairness to you John (and I do agree with you BTW) you were on the wrong end of some pretty heated exchanges with at least one of the banned members from what I remember.

[Lando_Griffin]

What happens if its a lot more than just ignoring people Ace and it trancends into your real life ?

Then they're pathetic c*nts who obviously LACK a life.

[Kharhaz]

Stu is allowed to post is he not? According to his status as the topic starter of this one, he is just one card away.

[bigmick]

What happens if its a lot more than just ignoring people Ace and it trancends into your real life ?

Then they're pathetic c*nts who obviously LACK a life.

Hard to argue with that really. Everybody is responsible for their own actions, and while there are always two sides to every story there seems little doubt from where I'm sitting that there has been some regrettable behaviour.

That said I've said things on here which I should have over the years myself. I've posted on here for about four or five years now (I know it seems like longer ) and you're bound to step off the edge sometimes in that time. A little bit like down your local, sooner or later you're going to get a bit rowdy one night.

The thing is though with all those people who are banned (and I forgot about Leg Barnes as well) they muist presumeably have enjoyed posting on here or they wouldn't have done it. GBJH was anothewr now I think about it, and young Bill was another sad loss to the football debate. Anyway, they must have all enjoyed it at some point so if they came back under the new, fairer regime I should think there would be a more than even chance they'd try and toe the line.

I say all this without having the slightest clue whether or not they either want to come back or whether they would. It just seems to me to be an extension of the new fairness that if we allow some people back who have been benned, we should look at others in the cold light of day too.

[Lando_Griffin]

What happens if its a lot more than just ignoring people Ace and it trancends into your real life ?

Then they're pathetic c*nts who obviously LACK a life.

Hard to argue with that really. Everybody is responsible for their own actions, and while there are always two sides to every story there seems little doubt from where I'm sitting that there has been some regrettable behaviour.

That said I've said things on here which I should have over the years myself. I've posted on here for about four or five years now (I know it seems like longer ) and you're bound to step off the edge sometimes in that time. A little bit like down your local, sooner or later you're going to get a bit rowdy one night.

The thing is though with all those people who are banned (and I forgot about Leg Barnes as well) they muist presumeably have enjoyed posting on here or they wouldn't have done it. GBJH was anothewr now I think about it, and young Bill was another sad loss to the football debate. Anyway, they must have all enjoyed it at some point so if they came back under the new, fairer regime I should think there would be a more than even chance they'd try and toe the line.

I say all this without having the slightest clue whether or not they either want to come back or whether they would. It just seems to me to be an extension of the new fairness that if we allow some people back who have been benned, we should look at others in the cold light of day too.

My opinion is this: If they deserved a lifetime ban then, they still deserve it now.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

[Ciggy]

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Word