| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:45 - Jul 2 with 2161 views | DropCliffsNotBombs |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:38 - Jul 2 by SitfcB |
Maybe I should’ve just left it as a (n/t) that would’ve been enough, doesn’t take a lot to set some off. |
It's your perogative to post what you have, but trying to worm out of what you've clearly meant is a bit pathetic and people are increasingly seeing through this rubbish.
If you post it, own it.
Edit - agree this should be locked. Everyone can see what was posted and the response has been correctly dismissive. [Post edited 2 Jul 2024 12:47]
|  | |  |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:46 - Jul 2 with 2152 views | nodge_blue |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:16 - Jul 2 by Herbivore |
Agreed, lots of Town news to discuss and given what a massive Town fan Sitters is, you have to wonder why he started this thread and chose the tone that he did? I know you've described it as not wise, but it's more than that isn't it? The thread has been deliberately created to further division and provoke arguments, but some are more bothered by people calling out his bullsh!t than they are by his bullsh!t.
It's been an ugly pattern on here for a while of some posters deliberately prodding and poking constantly or saying quite unpleasant things under the guise of 'bantz' and then going full Ballotelli when they get called out on it.
Also agree that the thread should probably be locked at this point. People have made their point, no need to keep going round in circles. |
Full Ballotelli lol.
Sitters started off being a bit joey barton stamping on an unsuspecting matt rhead. Before giving a Ronaldo wink whilst David Ellery looks at some red cards. |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:49 - Jul 2 with 2120 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:45 - Jul 2 by DropCliffsNotBombs |
It's your perogative to post what you have, but trying to worm out of what you've clearly meant is a bit pathetic and people are increasingly seeing through this rubbish.
If you post it, own it.
Edit - agree this should be locked. Everyone can see what was posted and the response has been correctly dismissive. [Post edited 2 Jul 2024 12:47]
|
Sitters is moving the thread on to point where Phil removes it. A familiar pattern*
* a general comment not aimed at him in particular. |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:54 - Jul 2 with 2060 views | SitfcB |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:49 - Jul 2 by Pinewoodblue |
Sitters is moving the thread on to point where Phil removes it. A familiar pattern*
* a general comment not aimed at him in particular. |
If I wanted to do that I could, but I’m not and I won’t.
It’s already been removed once! |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:57 - Jul 2 with 2053 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:21 - Jul 2 by Westcountryblue |
To be honest, I thought he was a little aggressive and confrontational as a poster. Undoubtedly, a highly strung guy. While a good debate is healthy, the way in which he did it came across as rather condescending at times. [Post edited 2 Jul 2024 13:11]
|
I on the other hand thought him to be reasoned and informed. Pushing back when being disagreed with can be perceived as aggressive and confrontational particularly if you disagree with his views. Sometimes was a bit condescending and strident in his views but they were by and large based on facts unlike where the arguments against were plucked from. Hope SB enjoys the brake and returns to us invigorated. |  | | |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:59 - Jul 2 with 2003 views | SitfcB |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:57 - Jul 2 by Eireannach_gorm |
I on the other hand thought him to be reasoned and informed. Pushing back when being disagreed with can be perceived as aggressive and confrontational particularly if you disagree with his views. Sometimes was a bit condescending and strident in his views but they were by and large based on facts unlike where the arguments against were plucked from. Hope SB enjoys the brake and returns to us invigorated. |
We should put a stop to this now. | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:03 - Jul 2 with 1974 views | BlueBadger |
Shame. Stokie is a true elite poster. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:06 - Jul 2 with 1943 views | leitrimblue |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:59 - Jul 2 by SitfcB |
We should put a stop to this now. |
Why? Is it not going they way you intended it to go?  |  | | |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:09 - Jul 2 with 1915 views | SitfcB |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:06 - Jul 2 by leitrimblue |
Why? Is it not going they way you intended it to go? |
  | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:10 - Jul 2 with 1903 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:54 - Jul 2 by SitfcB |
If I wanted to do that I could, but I’m not and I won’t.
It’s already been removed once! |
Put the stick down and stop poking the fire. | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:18 - Jul 2 with 1861 views | Eireannach_gorm |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:59 - Jul 2 by SitfcB |
We should put a stop to this now. |
'We' should. | | | |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:21 - Jul 2 with 1845 views | Buhrer |
I can't miss what I already have ignored. But was there ever a more pretentious poster?
B |  | | |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:21 - Jul 2 with 1848 views | baxterbasics |
Well it's not locked yet so I can have my say, which is:
Some of you take this forum and what is said in it far too seriously. |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:23 - Jul 2 with 1806 views | SitfcB |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:21 - Jul 2 by baxterbasics |
Well it's not locked yet so I can have my say, which is:
Some of you take this forum and what is said in it far too seriously. |
Amen. | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:28 - Jul 2 with 1747 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 12:32 - Jul 2 by Swansea_Blue |
Hmm. all that did was remind me I should have trademarked it
But I suppose there's nothing stopping me now...
SB |
Why not AG?? ;-) |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:29 - Jul 2 with 1746 views | baxterbasics |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 11:51 - Jul 2 by NthYorkshireBlue |
[Post edited 2 Jul 2024 12:11]
|
Have you really just gone through every forum post you ever made and deleted the text? | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:36 - Jul 2 with 1674 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:29 - Jul 2 by baxterbasics |
Have you really just gone through every forum post you ever made and deleted the text? |
Looks like it! | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:37 - Jul 2 with 1673 views | NthYorkshireBlue |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 11:30 - Jul 2 by nodge_blue |
Phil - just out of a technical interest, if a user is banned, is that based on an IP address and or a device ID?
What's stopping anyone using a VPN to log on and use a different user name?
Maybe that's one more for Gav - just interested..... |
Similarly, I've always wondered if the 2 tiered system (free users vs paid users) causes more problems than it solves. It must be more difficult to remove posts and ban users that are paid members as presumably they'd want their money back. |  | | |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:39 - Jul 2 with 1656 views | Trequartista |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:29 - Jul 2 by baxterbasics |
Have you really just gone through every forum post you ever made and deleted the text? |
Strange behaviour. Perhaps they use another itfc forum and they've been caught cheating on them with twtd. |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:41 - Jul 2 with 1631 views | USA |
@SitB
I preferred him to you! |  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:41 - Jul 2 with 1635 views | BlueBoots |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:36 - Jul 2 by Pinewoodblue |
Looks like it! |
Missed one...
|  |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:44 - Jul 2 with 1613 views | PhilTWTD |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:39 - Jul 2 by Trequartista |
Strange behaviour. Perhaps they use another itfc forum and they've been caught cheating on them with twtd. |
Bit odd, as you say. Just had a look at their data and had been banned previously under two other IDs. |  | | |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:47 - Jul 2 with 1560 views | SitfcB |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. on 13:41 - Jul 2 by USA |
@SitB
I preferred him to you! |
Ok. | |
| |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:47 - Jul 2 with 1558 views | TimeSyncOTP |
| Oh. The Stokie one has gone. (n/t) on 13:44 - Jul 2 by PhilTWTD |
Bit odd, as you say. Just had a look at their data and had been banned previously under two other IDs. |
Guessing he wan't a paid up member then  | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
