lbj

[Shark27]

Hold on though, I'd still rather have someone deluded about Stubbs on here than all sorts of racists/ fascists/ islamophobes/ homophobes / ***ists etc given a platform and defended by the mods on here.

Who is the racist and homophobe? And which one of the mods defended this? This sounds serious.

[gwru]

Ibj last post I saw by him think it was about Yates. Made sense. Keep off the Stubbs love-in not a problem. I don't want do-gooders on here who talk about people being racist but forget about suicide bombers & grooming.

[mikemiller]

Hold on though, I'd still rather have someone deluded about Stubbs on here than all sorts of racists/ fascists/ islamophobes/ homophobes / ***ists etc given a platform and defended by the mods on here.

I agree with that.... and if boredom was a factor in the banning , I'd (marginally) rather hear about Stubbsy, than the thoughts of Fuhrer Tommy Robinson, or of the views of somebody who lives in he USA, but it obsessed with minor bridge repairs, shop alterations, etc carried out by Rotherham council...

[mellowmiller]

I just don't read his posts so don't have a problem.

[millertop]

Hold on though, I'd still rather have someone deluded about Stubbs on here than all sorts of racists/ fascists/ islamophobes/ homophobes / ***ists etc given a platform and defended by the mods on here.

Ffs man

[gm_gm]

I agree with that.... and if boredom was a factor in the banning , I'd (marginally) rather hear about Stubbsy, than the thoughts of Fuhrer Tommy Robinson, or of the views of somebody who lives in he USA, but it obsessed with minor bridge repairs, shop alterations, etc carried out by Rotherham council...

The thing is Mike a lot of what you role and Brass post can be considered racist, nazi and hateful...it's all about perspective

[lbj]

"Frog can I ask why he was banned? Was he abusive? Was he offensive?
I missed why he was banned. Just interested"

Good question - I was told:

For "insulting" posters ? And taking threads off topic ?

When in reality I insulted no one and only answered posts.

And - the posts of threads swung my way - so to speak - typically posts stating fiction as fact or "one liners" describing more complex issues - ignoring the facts at the time that greatly affected the outcomes.

So I added let's say the "mitigating circumstances" that were to my knowledge more accurate and / or added depth to the posts involved.

I only ever ANSWERED POSTS...I DIDN'T LEAD THEM AWAY FROM TOPIC.

It was a gagging order !

I like more in depth discussions that
( for me ) means taking account of the circumstances at the time decisions were made.

Typically - the "adiquate budget" and the quality of players / loans brought into the club.

Typically - the chronologically of last seasons debacle with NW and his culling of half the squad - that needed replacements ( all within above mentioned "adequate budget" )

Typically - the injuries of two club captains - Freck's & Captain Kirk.

And many more actual - and well documented facts that greatly hindered our season. Yet oversimplification of complex issues were manifest.

I simply filled in the history.

I must have said something that was true..lol

Frog set this post up to appear neutral when he evidently is not. I expect a life ban soon - for no good reason - but that's freedom of speach for you - even at this level.....independent thinkers are not liked - even hated because......

Just because.....the human condition !

That's the interesting part !

[Silly-miller]

"Frog can I ask why he was banned? Was he abusive? Was he offensive?
I missed why he was banned. Just interested"

Good question - I was told:

For "insulting" posters ? And taking threads off topic ?

When in reality I insulted no one and only answered posts.

And - the posts of threads swung my way - so to speak - typically posts stating fiction as fact or "one liners" describing more complex issues - ignoring the facts at the time that greatly affected the outcomes.

So I added let's say the "mitigating circumstances" that were to my knowledge more accurate and / or added depth to the posts involved.

I only ever ANSWERED POSTS...I DIDN'T LEAD THEM AWAY FROM TOPIC.

It was a gagging order !

I like more in depth discussions that
( for me ) means taking account of the circumstances at the time decisions were made.

Typically - the "adiquate budget" and the quality of players / loans brought into the club.

Typically - the chronologically of last seasons debacle with NW and his culling of half the squad - that needed replacements ( all within above mentioned "adequate budget" )

Typically - the injuries of two club captains - Freck's & Captain Kirk.

And many more actual - and well documented facts that greatly hindered our season. Yet oversimplification of complex issues were manifest.

I simply filled in the history.

I must have said something that was true..lol

Frog set this post up to appear neutral when he evidently is not. I expect a life ban soon - for no good reason - but that's freedom of speach for you - even at this level.....independent thinkers are not liked - even hated because......

Just because.....the human condition !

That's the interesting part !

I think you were banned for insulting people who had a different opinion than you. I can't be sure which post it was but just before you were banned you went a little over board with the I love Stubbs talk once. Check your posts before the ban and see what it may be

[frogmiller]

lbj was given a two week ban. He is free to post so please leave out the bitching and asking for cards and other bans. If you don't like what he's posting don't read it. Evreryone deservse a second chance and this is his. Or hers.

lbj.
the top 2 lines of this post is what I posted in the opening post. It wasn't directed at you it was an appeal to other users basically saying what's happens in the past should stay in the past. It wasn't meant to be neutral it was set up in support of you.

Unfortunately you haven't seen that side of it you've just seen something you wanted to.

That last post is a load of bollax and you know it. I have a little violin playing just in my ear for you.

There are other Rotherham United forums that you may want to try if you're not happy with this one or the way it is run. I frankly don't give a flying feck what you do. But whilst you are posting on here the only two moderators are me and CAM and that isn't likely to change any time soon.

Your choise for now.

[millertop]

lbj was given a two week ban. He is free to post so please leave out the bitching and asking for cards and other bans. If you don't like what he's posting don't read it. Evreryone deservse a second chance and this is his. Or hers.

lbj.
the top 2 lines of this post is what I posted in the opening post. It wasn't directed at you it was an appeal to other users basically saying what's happens in the past should stay in the past. It wasn't meant to be neutral it was set up in support of you.

Unfortunately you haven't seen that side of it you've just seen something you wanted to.

That last post is a load of bollax and you know it. I have a little violin playing just in my ear for you.

There are other Rotherham United forums that you may want to try if you're not happy with this one or the way it is run. I frankly don't give a flying feck what you do. But whilst you are posting on here the only two moderators are me and CAM and that isn't likely to change any time soon.

Your choise for now.

Take a deep breath, count to ten then say feck it and ignore the bitching for week

Oh and if complains go in then tell them to grow up or grow a pair, give them a yellow for complaining unless of course it's serious