Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Jumpin through hoops on the soccer forum

Options
124»

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,587 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    KdjaCL wrote:
    So umm it begs the question....where are your facts to the opposite?
    You cannot prove me wrong as much as i cant prove you right.

    this is your argument? I now have to prove a negative otherwise you are right? are you insane?

    how can I prove that liverpool fans didn't rob from the dead at hillsborough?

    You are saying that they did do it when they didn't. There is no way of me proving that they didn't. I can show plenty of links and online stories that say they didn't but this wouldn't be 'facts' for you I guess. Or the taylor report findings below, where again he denies the stories but of course he can't prove a negative either.

    taylor interim report pg44 wrote:
    False Reports
    257. Before this Inquiry began, there were stories reported in the press, and said to have emanated from
    police officers present at the match, of "mass drunkenness". It was said that drunken fans urinated on the
    police while they were pulling the dead and injured out, that others had even urinated on the bodies of the dead
    and stolen their belongings. Not a single witness was called before the Inquiry to support any of those
    allegations although every opportunity was afforded for any of the represented parties to have any witness
    called whom they wished. As soon as the allegations I have mentioned were made in the press, Mr Peter
    Wright, Chief Constable of South Yorkshire, made a dignified statement dissociating himself from such grave
    and emotive calumnies. Those who made them, and those who disseminated them, would have done better to
    hold their peace."


  • Options
    #93
    KdjaCL
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,346 ✭✭✭✭KdjaCL


    copacetic wrote:
    this is your argument? I now have to prove a negative otherwise you are right? are you insane?

    how can I prove that liverpool fans didn't rob from the dead at hillsborough?
    .




    I dont have an argument,I have an opinion wich is based on facts i seen in the media i was then accused of being a bad person :(

    if its online then it must be true.
    kdjac.com wrote:
    the world is square



    kdjac


  • Options
    #94
    KdjaCL
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,346 ✭✭✭✭KdjaCL


    Hagar wrote:
    I came here expecting to be entertained by people jumping through hoops.
    This is very disappointing.
    I'm off to the Juggling Forum to see if anything is happening over there.


    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4776181634656145640

    there yah go.


    kdjac


  • Options
    #95
    copacetic
    Subscribers Posts: 16,587 ✭✭✭✭copacetic


    KdjaCL wrote:
    I dont have an argument,I have an opinion wich is based on facts i seen in the media i was then accused of being a bad person :(

    if its online then it must be true.




    kdjac

    so now that taylor report isn't true because it is online?

    again with the 'facts' that only you are privvy too?


  • Options
    #96
    ecksor
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 10,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭ecksor


    Savman wrote:
    Been using the site since 2003 actually ;)
    Not that it makes any difference...

    In this case I think it does make a difference since having a view on how best to deal with the specific behaviour that prompted this change is relevant. If people are ignoring that, then it's not very useful.

    But, since you were here then, some questions:

    What did you think of the problems the moderators were facing and did you suggest any alternatives at the time on these forums when it was discussed?

    If you have been around since 2003, then you've used more than one account. Were you banned from the Soccer forum by any chance?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Mr. Presentable
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,496 ✭✭✭Mr. Presentable


    copacetic wrote:
    this is your argument? I now have to prove a negative otherwise you are right? are you insane?

    how can I prove that liverpool fans didn't rob from the dead at hillsborough?

    You are saying that they did do it when they didn't. There is no way of me proving that they didn't. I can show plenty of links and online stories that say they didn't but this wouldn't be 'facts' for you I guess. Or the taylor report findings below, where again he denies the stories but of course he can't prove a negative either.

    You know, the thread this was discussed on was locked due to it being fractious. Can't you either leave the discussion there or start a thread on the conspiracies forum to air your opinions (facts).


  • Options
    #98
    Savman
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,323 ✭✭✭Savman


    ecksor wrote:
    If you have been around since 2003, then you've used more than one account. Were you banned from the Soccer forum by any chance?
    Actually I locked myself out of the old account, since being granted "access" haven't been banned from the Soccer forum itself yet, but I usually avoid the pointless long debates about ManU V Liverpool and who has the biggest penis :rolleyes:
    I don't really care enough about the Soccer access issue tbh, just thought the "Feedback" forum might be the place for some feedback. Otherwise I don't see the point of this forum at all, esp if people are saying "oh there's no point posting on Feedback it wont get you anywhere" :confused:

    It's as easy just to ban a troublesome user as it is to get the normals to go thru a rigmarole process that still isnt foolproof. You can't police d'internet and the current filters do sweet F.A. (IMHO).


  • Options
    #99
    The Muppet
    Registered Users Posts: 14,003 ✭✭✭✭The Muppet


    KdjaCL wrote:
    We move less threads.


    kdjac

    Interesting Point. Why are the bitching threads not just moved to the thunderdome and let the users get on with it. That's what I thought the thunderdome was for.


    On topic.

    Anyone with half a brain cell can easily circumvent the access restrictions that were put in place if they were arsed to do so. It's the Internet, you can oly do so much to police it, if someone really determined to bypass restrictions they will. Therfore is there any point in punishing the genuine user by making them "jump through hoops" to gain access. Personally I dont think it is .


  • Options
    #100
    RE*AC*TOR
    Registered Users Posts: 7,482 ✭✭✭RE*AC*TOR


    This thread got completely derailed. It wasn't originally about Kdjac's trolling of other forums members, it was about all the red tape and rules around the forum.

    I think that point has been covered ad infinatum. We know why the current rules were put into place, but there's still a demand for a less restrictive venue. I think both can co-exist (in a coalition :D ).


  • Options
    #101
    Tha Gopher
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭Tha Gopher


    The Soccer forum is far less strict than AH, mainly because Soccer has WRITTEN rules (unlike AH or Politics, where it is possible to be banned because the mod is in a bad mood). Not all of them obviously but we know who they are. Soccer mods dont seem to ban people for disagreeing with their opinions at least.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement