owlsabout wrote:Just a quick one stan A elnsteins is having a rest for a month . But can be reached on youtube , type in stan elnsteins world

Why?

Apparently been banned for asking questions

He prob farted or something as dispicable I got a permanent ban for asking if a match was on the telly ........ free speech & all that

owlsabout wrote:Apparently been banned for asking questions

Surely his ban is for breaking the rules of this forum.

excessbee wrote:

owlsabout wrote:Apparently been banned for asking questions

Surely his ban is for breaking the rules of this forum.

Not necessarily

The reason for his ban was clearly explained in an earlier thread.

My question why was to ask why anyone would want to continue hearing his negativity on u tube or anywhere else.

Cornish Exile wrote:The reason for his ban was clearly explained in an earlier thread.

My question why was to ask why anyone would want to continue hearing his negativity on u tube or anywhere else.

Now don’t get me wrong, I find the vendettas on this board disruptive and boring but not all his views are negative, I don’t think that’s fair. Like all fans , he wants a better future for Newport County. Why they’d want to watch him on you tube? Presumably to get another point of view other than the orthodox one on here?

Cornish Exile wrote:The reason for his ban was clearly explained in an earlier thread.

My question why was to ask why anyone would want to continue hearing his negativity on u tube or anywhere else.

I find him fairly boring on occasions, but he's nowhere near as boring as the board-bummers who frequent this place.

Fair few points to raise.

Firstly it appears that Stan from reports got banned for a month for the Cardinal Sin of being a Barrister in that after putting up with constant verbal abuse from Jimmy Exile he noticed that Jimmy had disowned his brother basically.
Big deal one would think but a 4 week ban takes effect.
Stan has just done his second U tube appearance this morning.
At least I now recognise his ugly mug (only joking) and do recognise him so at least I can say hello if he gets to one of our matches.
The fella is clearly County through and through.
How many of you would offer to put £2K down to start the forlorn hope of a Stadium fund and get dogs abuse in return.
My good mate Harps 62 got a life ban for the Capital offence of having 2 Usernames despite running MOM last season which just fizzled out when he was chucked off the site.
The longest ever thread is still running started by him and Reebok.
Tiny little things get people banned but consistant dogs abuse is accepted.
Anyway I spout on too much.
Back to Stan, its not for me listening to 30 minutes of dialogue similarly not interested in what Taff has to say either but I wish them well as they hopefully enjoy what they are doing and have County at heart.
Month will fly by Stan.

jollysuperstar wrote:Fair few points to raise.

Firstly it appears that Stan from reports got banned for a month for the Cardinal Sin of being a Barrister in that after putting up with constant verbal abuse from Jimmy Exile he noticed that Jimmy had disowned his brother basically.
Big deal one would think but a 4 week ban takes effect.
Stan has just done his second U tube appearance this morning.
At least I now recognise his ugly mug (only joking) and do recognise him so at least I can say hello if he gets to one of our matches.
The fella is clearly County through and through.
How many of you would offer to put £2K down to start the forlorn hope of a Stadium fund and get dogs abuse in return.
My good mate Harps 62 got a life ban for the Capital offence of having 2 Usernames despite running MOM last season which just fizzled out when he was chucked off the site.
The longest ever thread is still running started by him and Reebok.
Tiny little things get people banned but consistant dogs abuse is accepted.
Anyway I spout on too much.
Back to Stan, its not for me listening to 30 minutes of dialogue similarly not interested in what Taff has to say either but I wish them well as they hopefully enjoy what they are doing and have County at heart.
Month will fly by Stan.

I just seen Stans is second video it was only ten minutes long. Tbh I didn't think he was that negative.

Lenwearesaved wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:Fair few points to raise.

Firstly it appears that Stan from reports got banned for a month for the Cardinal Sin of being a Barrister in that after putting up with constant verbal abuse from Jimmy Exile he noticed that Jimmy had disowned his brother basically.
Big deal one would think but a 4 week ban takes effect.
Stan has just done his second U tube appearance this morning.
At least I now recognise his ugly mug (only joking) and do recognise him so at least I can say hello if he gets to one of our matches.
The fella is clearly County through and through.
How many of you would offer to put £2K down to start the forlorn hope of a Stadium fund and get dogs abuse in return.
My good mate Harps 62 got a life ban for the Capital offence of having 2 Usernames despite running MOM last season which just fizzled out when he was chucked off the site.
The longest ever thread is still running started by him and Reebok.
Tiny little things get people banned but consistant dogs abuse is accepted.
Anyway I spout on too much.
Back to Stan, its not for me listening to 30 minutes of dialogue similarly not interested in what Taff has to say either but I wish them well as they hopefully enjoy what they are doing and have County at heart.
Month will fly by Stan.

I just seen Stans is second video it was only ten minutes long. Tbh I didn't think he was that negative.

I like Stan. Spent a very pleasant afternoon / evening with him at Wembley. He's friendly, funny, and kind.
His position on the need for a stadium has been held for many years. That we as a Club failed to address that, he is in fact correct about - hence no stadium. What he isn't, is negative. He bleeds Newport County like any other one of us. Great guy. That's not to say I agree with him on everything, nor he me.

I must say , that’s my impression too. His main problem is he disrupts threads with vendettas against his sworn enemies on this board who have a history between them. In fairness , he has good reason when he’s misrepresented or misquoted but it bores other posters. Like you I don’t find his views negative, on the contrary. I think he wants to “out “ humbug and dishonesty but his occasional pomposity grates with some people. I think that this occasional vice is forgivable as long as it’s entertaining . Live and let live I say, what was the ban for because I still don’t get it? It seems a bit arbitrary.

lowandhard wrote:I must say , that’s my impression too. His main problem is he disrupts threads with vendettas against his sworn enemies on this board who have a history between them. In fairness , he has good reason when he’s misrepresented or misquoted but it bores other posters. Like you I don’t find his views negative, on the contrary. I think he wants to “out “ humbug and dishonesty but his occasional pomposity grates with some people. I think that this occasional vice is forgivable as long as it’s entertaining . Live and let live I say, what was the ban for because I still don’t get it? It seems a bit arbitrary.

It was for breaking the rule that goes something like : "speculation on the identity of an individual poster, will incur an indefinite ban"... or something like that.

Too many people banned for pathetic reasons, are we that precious,some need to man up. Hope you're back soon Stan

Ah I see, yes that’s a cardinal sin apparently though a lot of us know who each other are. Personally, I couldn’t give a flying f*ck : anything I say on here I’d be prepared to say publicly ( not that most people would be exactly queueing up in their thousands to hear it ). Do the rules get reviewed or voted on?i just wondered how they get arrived at. I tend to take most notice of posts that I can put a face or name to, anonymous posts defending a contentious club view always strike me as rather suspicious though I wouldn’t know enough about the people on the board to tie such a post to a certain name. Now I know not to try, at least out loud on here eh?