RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

I still find it odd that people consider the only way to have a discussion is with people ranting and screaming from an extreme position. There'd be plenty of disagreement on how to go forward on a great many general policy areas and specifics from the broad mass in the middle

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

Mikey Brown wrote:Yup. Can we vote to bring him back? I might knock up some J4UG arm bands.

Zhivago wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:Yup. Can we vote to bring him back? I might knock up some J4UG arm bands.

Better would be to vote for a mod for this 'Politics and stuff' forum. It clearly requires a different and more attuned moderation strategy.

Zhivago wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

canta_brian wrote: This.

Sorry all, but I am not sure this feels remotely right. Now I know that I didn't read the original posts as they were deleted. But prodding someone with a stick until they snap is equally as bad as snapping in my opinion.

Yes it is.But if you cant even propose an alternative point of view without it being taken as being "prodded with a stick" then something has to give. I would say the ability to say you disagree without being given dogs abuse is more important then keeping someone around for the sake of it.

Yes but the incident that caused all this was not because cashead 'proposed an alternative point of view'.

Zhivago wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

I completely agree. And the mods don't have the humility to accept that they made the wrong decision. They could have made a firm statement with a much longer ban without going for the nuclear option of a permanent ban.

Donny osmond wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

I completely agree. And the mods don't have the humility to accept that they made the wrong decision. They could have made a firm statement with a much longer ban without going for the nuclear option of a permanent ban.

They made the right decision. He's been banned numerous times for various lengths and it never makes a blind bit of difference.

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

I still find it odd that people consider the only way to have a discussion is with people ranting and screaming from an extreme position. There'd be plenty of disagreement on how to go forward on a great many general policy areas and specifics from the broad mass in the middle

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

Numbers wrote:Does anyone actually get offended by what UG says tho, I find this all a bit over sensitive and reactionary, who cares what he says or anyone else for that matter, it's supposed to be a discussion forum and if you don't want to talk to him then fair enough put him on ignore.

Without him the discussion will dry up, so if what is wanted is a sterile lifeless board then that is what will have been achieved.

Why can't we have a poll of whether or not he should be banned or are we operating in a dictatorship.

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

No alternate opinion to Zhivago? Or to you? Or to jared? Or to morepork? I wasn't aware that you chaps were in such agreement with Digby and donny.

Again, for people who clearly haven't bothered to read the thread. He wasn't permanently banned for abuse he was permanently banned for threats.

Stooo wrote:

Donny osmond wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
I completely agree. And the mods don't have the humility to accept that they made the wrong decision. They could have made a firm statement with a much longer ban without going for the nuclear option of a permanent ban.

They made the right decision. He's been banned numerous times for various lengths and it never makes a blind bit of difference.

~HAve they fuck! This is all about an ego trip.

Bunch of circle jerking right wing pricks.

You need to mtfu.

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

I still find it odd that people consider the only way to have a discussion is with people ranting and screaming from an extreme position. There'd be plenty of disagreement on how to go forward on a great many general policy areas and specifics from the broad mass in the middle

Yeah. Nice one. Stay in the middle or fuck off. "Extreme" is a very relative definition. I think the current political centre that is so in fashion these days to be quite extreme.

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:This is the last nail in the coffin for the non-rugby part of this board.

As it is, I rarely post in the political board anymore, and nothing happens in the crooked feed anymore either. With the breakdown in blackout rugby, too, there's only in-season talk about rugby, and nothing else.

There is no alternate opinion. There is no-one who stands out. There is no way to actually have a discussion.

It's a crying shame that this place has gone so much to the dogs. You guys are just here to take it out back and shoot it.

I still find it odd that people consider the only way to have a discussion is with people ranting and screaming from an extreme position. There'd be plenty of disagreement on how to go forward on a great many general policy areas and specifics from the broad mass in the middle

Yeah. Nice one. Stay in the middle or fuck off. "Extreme" is a very relative definition. I think the current political centre that is so in fashion these days to be quite extreme.

J Dory wrote:I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

Stooo wrote:

Numbers wrote:Does anyone actually get offended by what UG says tho, I find this all a bit over sensitive and reactionary, who cares what he says or anyone else for that matter, it's supposed to be a discussion forum and if you don't want to talk to him then fair enough put him on ignore.

Without him the discussion will dry up, so if what is wanted is a sterile lifeless board then that is what will have been achieved.

Why can't we have a poll of whether or not he should be banned or are we operating in a dictatorship.

Because then the circle jerkers don't get their little "win" over him

J Dory wrote:I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

Donny osmond wrote:

J Dory wrote:I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

"The will of the board" fucking hell, give yourself a crown why don't you

OptimisticJock wrote: this thread is braw.

Zhivago wrote:

J Dory wrote:I have a cunning plan. UG, why don't you register under another name? That way the mods can continue to stand in the corner they've painted themselves into with the "death penalty for threats" stance, while quietly allowing the will of the board (except Donny and Cas) to prevail.

This is really the heart of the issue.