FAO GarlickBread

[GarlickBread]

Well, I must have missed the posts that have offended you.

Garlick tends to be on the same page as me on most things - and I will certainly continue to speak my views.

Garlick, you can be my mate

Thanks 59/60, appreciate the support.

Strange post that 59, if anyone has suggested that you, Garlick or anyone else will not be allowed to speak their views I must have missed it, please point me in the right direction.

That's exactly what Alto is suggesting in his OP, it's basically a threat of a banning if I don't toe the party line.

Freedom of speech, my arse.

No need to ban me though, I won't bother posting again and will leave you lot to your negative echo chamber where fact-based discussion seems to be frowned upon.

I'd say that I hope you all enjoy the season, but I reckon most of you would only enjoy it if you're proved right and we're relegated

[1959_60]

Thanks 59/60, appreciate the support.



That's exactly what Alto is suggesting in his OP, it's basically a threat of a banning if I don't toe the party line.

Freedom of speech, my arse.

No need to ban me though, I won't bother posting again and will leave you lot to your negative echo chamber where fact-based discussion seems to be frowned upon.

I'd say that I hope you all enjoy the season, but I reckon most of you would only enjoy it if you're proved right and we're relegated

I understand your feelings Garlickand I'm on your side. If i were you I'd just continue as normal and ignore the thought police on here.

Well done lads.

[The Bedlington Terrier]

I understand your feelings Garlickand I'm on your side. If i were you I'd just continue as normal and ignore the thought police on here.

Well done lads.

"Thought Police?" Please explain?

[The Bedlington Terrier]

Thanks 59/60, appreciate the support.



That's exactly what Alto is suggesting in his OP, it's basically a threat of a banning if I don't toe the party line.

Freedom of speech, my arse.

No need to ban me though, I won't bother posting again and will leave you lot to your negative echo chamber where fact-based discussion seems to be frowned upon.

I'd say that I hope you all enjoy the season, but I reckon most of you would only enjoy it if you're proved right and we're relegated

That's a shame GarlickBread. Unusually for me I found a lot of what you said I totally agreed with.

I'm not sure what got Alto's back up, but you trying to put sinkov right with empirical evidence is a complete waste of time. He's a former Accrington GSOB, and by heck they are always right!

g

[sinkov]

That's a shame GarlickBread. Unusually for me I found a lot of what you said I totally agreed with.

I'm not sure what got Alto's back up, but you trying to put sinkov right with empirical evidence is a complete waste of time. He's a former Accrington GSOB, and by heck they are always right!

g

Just on that BT, in the context of a currency that has been over 1.60, even 1.15 qualifies as 'around 1.10' imo, Garlick chose not to agree and went to great lengths, posting graph after graph after graph after graph in attempt to prove me wrong. Well he's entitled to do that and I'm often wrong, but I just couldn't be bothering with such pedantry, I've better things to do with my time than argue obscure points with obsessives like Garlick.

Anyway, it seems like Garlick has got this forum at each others throats, which always happens when posters like him are around, in fact it often seems their aim. It survived well enough before he arrived, it will survive well enough now he's gone, and it tells you all you need to know that he found it impossible to comply with a simple request to be polite and respectful of other poster's views. It takes some doing to get banned off this site, and while Garlick hasn't been banned, it seems he jumped before what he knew was the inevitable push arrived.