![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
Yep, I don't actually understand this threat either.BackFromUSA wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:53pm EVERYTHING explained here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=96662
Perhaps I made the wrong choice and I should have permanently banned Saynta AND the posters that quoted the deleted post in order for it to remain on the board as well as the original poster?
Surely they were even more guilty that the original poster. (What?!) That poster deleted the post before it was reported / seen YET those other posters WILLINGLY quoted it and GLEEFULLY let it remain quoted in their posts, without editing, before it had to be deleted.
Surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander?
Those posters did not have to quote the post itself when replying. It was their decision. They should also pay the consequence,
Yes? I think no.
As with the multiple users of the banned term, after it was banned ... I decided to let everything slide and everyone starts with a clean slate ... except Con of course.
The rule is in place.
Use CHO as much as you want. Just not with "the" in front of it as Con used it.
It means something different.
As for gordo': that was a ban every day of the week. Full stop. No place for that on this forum. Ever.
Well I don't consider myself a decent poster, but I do have a condom in my wallet........
I'll get back to you after I run this post through urban dictionary.kosifantutti wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 9:07pm Is anyone interested in the last share in our sponsorship of Brandon White?
That’s not really relevant to the thread but it’s a s*** thread. IMHO
When responding to a particular post it is appropriate to quote that post. People are told off for not quoting a post as then things get confusing.dragit wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 10:07pmYep, I don't actually understand this threat either.BackFromUSA wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:53pm EVERYTHING explained here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=96662
Perhaps I made the wrong choice and I should have permanently banned Saynta AND the posters that quoted the deleted post in order for it to remain on the board as well as the original poster?
Surely they were even more guilty that the original poster. (What?!) That poster deleted the post before it was reported / seen YET those other posters WILLINGLY quoted it and GLEEFULLY let it remain quoted in their posts, without editing, before it had to be deleted.
Surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander?
Those posters did not have to quote the post itself when replying. It was their decision. They should also pay the consequence,
Yes? I think no.
As with the multiple users of the banned term, after it was banned ... I decided to let everything slide and everyone starts with a clean slate ... except Con of course.
The rule is in place.
Use CHO as much as you want. Just not with "the" in front of it as Con used it.
It means something different.
As for gordo': that was a ban every day of the week. Full stop. No place for that on this forum. Ever.
When did we start banning people who have quoted another poster who is breaking the rules, we don't do it for racist or threatening posts and it's not in the rules as far as I can tell… even if someone quoted a post so it was recorded, I don't think that is an offence, let alone more guilty than original post - how ridiculous!… the mods have the ability to edit posts and I'm sure a pornographic picture wouldn't be left on the forum for months just because it had been quoted.
Your interpretation of WILLINGLY and GLEEFULLY quoting seem both irrelevant an emotional clutch. The goose and the gander? Is someone replying to a racist post a gander?… Of course not, neither are those replying to a disgusting pornographic description.
I think everyone is sick of hearing a couple of posters monotonously accuse the rest of the forum of some disgusting and absurd inference… when nothing posted has suggested the link whatsoever, once you banned the nickname, you endorsed their false implication which is slanderous and wholeheartedly rejected.
I haven't read one post from Con or anyone that would suggest the connection alleged by a few, so the point is still absolutely moot.
I’m not one to judge CQ, nudie runCQ SAINT wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:35pmI should probably explain that it happened at the Raglan Hotel where we refilled the esky, had a pee and a few pots at the bar. Much to our surprise the locals welcomed it and you only did it in your first trip.CQ SAINT wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:30pmAs I said, I never read it and still dont know what the description of the definition was but I can see it has upset you. Do you feel you have been ignored?
I am an inductee of a club football tradition of doing a nudie run around the bus half way home from Boyne Island to Rockhampton after a win, so I better not speak any more. Lol.
Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 8:34amI’m not one to judge CQ, nudie runCQ SAINT wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:35pmI should probably explain that it happened at the Raglan Hotel where we refilled the esky, had a pee and a few pots at the bar. Much to our surprise the locals welcomed it and you only did it in your first trip.CQ SAINT wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:30pmAs I said, I never read it and still dont know what the description of the definition was but I can see it has upset you. Do you feel you have been ignored?
I am an inductee of a club football tradition of doing a nudie run around the bus half way home from Boyne Island to Rockhampton after a win, so I better not speak any more. Lol.your heart out.
But a pee at the bar goes a little too far![]()
i’ve thoughtThis forum used to be all about footy and our Club,
Come on asiu,
Stopped reading right thereBackFromUSA wrote: ↑Thu 31 Jan 2019 6:53pm EVERYTHING explained here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=96662
Perhaps I made the wrong choice and I should have permanently banned Saynta
Normally I would agree...but is it history? Because he's still at it, hasn't apologised and acts like it's his exclusive right to break the rules...how much abuse has he sprayed around in the last few days? He's obviously a good mate of Simon's, but as a mod you can only protect your mates for so long while they make a mockery of the site rules, surely? When he's gone for a spell to cool down (whenever that is...couple months worth of venting and still counting), then we can move on.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:01am Perpetrators are not always prosecuted for each crime and the poster got away with this post but that is history.
Seems like you are craving some sound and reasoned comments in another whinge fest thread (Santya, BFUSA & couple others excluded).
I take offence to this.degruch wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:10amNormally I would agree...but is it history? Because he's still at it, hasn't apologised and acts like it's his exclusive right to break the rules...how much abuse has he sprayed around in the last few days? He's obviously a good mate of Simon's, but as a mod you can only protect your mates for so long while they make a mockery of the site rules, surely? When he's gone for a spell to cool down (whenever that is...couple months worth of venting and still counting), then we can move on.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:01am Perpetrators are not always prosecuted for each crime and the poster got away with this post but that is history.
Sorry to hear that Simon, several of us took offense to being called perverts and liars for 8 weeks too, so I fully empathise.BackFromUSA wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 12:23pmI take offence to this.degruch wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:10amNormally I would agree...but is it history? Because he's still at it, hasn't apologised and acts like it's his exclusive right to break the rules...how much abuse has he sprayed around in the last few days? He's obviously a good mate of Simon's, but as a mod you can only protect your mates for so long while they make a mockery of the site rules, surely? When he's gone for a spell to cool down (whenever that is...couple months worth of venting and still counting), then we can move on.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:01am Perpetrators are not always prosecuted for each crime and the poster got away with this post but that is history.
FWIW I don't think you have favourites either, however I do think you were misled by a handful of posters into banning a common nickname because of a bizarre reference that no-one had ever heard of, let alone inferred. Not a single post has been offered up which connects some obscene sex act to our coach.BackFromUSA wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 12:23pmI take offence to this.degruch wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:10amNormally I would agree...but is it history? Because he's still at it, hasn't apologised and acts like it's his exclusive right to break the rules...how much abuse has he sprayed around in the last few days? He's obviously a good mate of Simon's, but as a mod you can only protect your mates for so long while they make a mockery of the site rules, surely? When he's gone for a spell to cool down (whenever that is...couple months worth of venting and still counting), then we can move on.Joffa Burns wrote: ↑Fri 01 Feb 2019 11:01am Perpetrators are not always prosecuted for each crime and the poster got away with this post but that is history.
I don’t know Saynta at all.
I know two people who post here and neither has even come close to breaking a rule in years. Both just talk footy. And therein likes the key - just talk footy.
I am sick of this favouritism crap.
I am going to review the rules so that this forum becomes footy only. Enough of the crap! Perhaps if you post crap here, rather than warnings or a ban I might just exclude that poster from the fan forum and limit them to Animal Enclosure forever. And just leave the posters who want to talk pure footy here. Those who are moved to the Animal Enclosure can still read the Fan Forum but can only contribute over at the Animal Enclosure. I shall even look into how we can possibly automatically mirror topics from Fan Forum to Animal Enclosure.
But eneough is enough.
This interpersonal dispute crap has to stop!