jollysuperstar wrote:AGB
Give over Stan never made an attack on Gavin
An awful lot of fans were very disappointed that he failed to attend 3 meetings on the trot
It was nice to see him at the final one and for my sins I got a pat on the back from him.
Stan is a very long standing fan who has been barking on for years about a ground which looks like it will now once more bite us on the bum
You are a serial Ostrich who cannot see beyond perfection.
Anybody dares question anything relating to the team gets insulted by you and always you fail to man up when contributors query your Insults
Everybody is a keyboard warrior in your narrow world
A choice of sitting next to Stan or you at a County game it would be Stan every time.
Dream on

Come on Harps. "Stan never made an attack on Gavin?". You must be having a laugh.

Unbelievable
Do you not understand that the board are not our owners
They are our representatives
Nobody with the odd tiny exception are unhappy in general with what they are trying to do but mistakes have and are still being made
That will come with a board of volunteers
But your continual lambasting of any critism is pathetic
Supporters who have spent a lifetime supporting the boys bring insulted as key board warriors
You always get may be a hundred at every meeting and always will
It's not all wonderful and questions are asked at every meeting until dear Mr Dando calls time
Some meetings do get heated you know because you are there
Anyway keep insulting every one who disagrees with you as a keyboard warrior

Cornish Exile wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:AGB
Give over Stan never made an attack on Gavin
An awful lot of fans were very disappointed that he failed to attend 3 meetings on the trot
It was nice to see him at the final one and for my sins I got a pat on the back from him.
Stan is a very long standing fan who has been barking on for years about a ground which looks like it will now once more bite us on the bum
You are a serial Ostrich who cannot see beyond perfection.
Anybody dares question anything relating to the team gets insulted by you and always you fail to man up when contributors query your Insults
Everybody is a keyboard warrior in your narrow world
A choice of sitting next to Stan or you at a County game it would be Stan every time.
Dream on

Come on Harps. "Stan never made an attack on Gavin?". You must be having a laugh.

Its Jolly and appreciate you have always been one of his keenest sparring parrners with George Street
Must be happy to see him banned eh

Well AGB to start with those clubs fans are protesting about owners who they feel are ripping off or otherwise mismanaging their football club , they are not protesting about relatively small amounts ( as compared to total turnover ) paid out to industrial tribunals. I have never heard of a fan protest along those lines.
If you wish to continue this perhaps you can tell me then, in view of your opinion of Stan Einstein’s posts
a) why a lifelong fan of our football club would wish to derail our season?
b) how a few posts on an unofficial message board could achieve such an end?
c) how a fan could ask questions when they are not in command of sufficient information to formulate them?

Alan G Bryant wrote:Any man that tries to derail our football club during our play off push by revealing Flynn's salary and colluding with a bitter ex employee to launch a personal attack on our chairman can never ever claim to have the interests of the club at heart. I see Swansea paid out over £100k in tribunal fees last month by the way.

You and Stan are obviously polar opposites. He sees transparency and openness as working in the best interests of the club. I will not attempt to explain his views further as he has done that on numerous occasions here himself.

You defend the club blindly and see any attempt at questioning the Chairman (for example by helping an ex employee) as an attack upon the club. It isn't.

I have no idea of what happens in the Boardroom as I live many miles away and get most of my information from this mb. I am pretty sure that all the Directors are doing their very best to do whatever they are charged to do in the best interest of the club. They wouldn't be there if they didn't. That does not exempt them from questioning. Please try and understand the difference.

jollysuperstar wrote:

Cornish Exile wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:AGB
Give over Stan never made an attack on Gavin
An awful lot of fans were very disappointed that he failed to attend 3 meetings on the trot
It was nice to see him at the final one and for my sins I got a pat on the back from him.
Stan is a very long standing fan who has been barking on for years about a ground which looks like it will now once more bite us on the bum
You are a serial Ostrich who cannot see beyond perfection.
Anybody dares question anything relating to the team gets insulted by you and always you fail to man up when contributors query your Insults
Everybody is a keyboard warrior in your narrow world
A choice of sitting next to Stan or you at a County game it would be Stan every time.
Dream on

Come on Harps. "Stan never made an attack on Gavin?". You must be having a laugh.

Its Jolly and appreciate you have always been one of his keenest sparring parrners with George Street
Must be happy to see him banned eh

Couldn't care less . However, if you break the rules, you should accept the consequences.As a lawyer, he would be aware of that.

Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

2. To assist with the smooth running of the website, moderator decisions should not be debated publicly on the forum. If you feel a moderator has made an unfair or wrong decision then please PM the site admin directly who will review your complaint, discuss it further and if necessary take appropriate actions.

Triangle wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

2. To assist with the smooth running of the website, moderator decisions should not be debated publicly on the forum. If you feel a moderator has made an unfair or wrong decision then please PM the site admin directly who will review your complaint, discuss it further and if necessary take appropriate actions.

"Sir , sir, the bigger boys are breaking the rules"

Triangle you absolute saddo!

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

Haha , was that really the case? So in fact nobody’s real identity was betrayed. Jeez, this is as bad as the Stasi it’s a good job our mods don’t have to cope with Luton fans
So Stan is now double-exiled eh? Exiled in Ireland, exiled from weareexiles. An ultra exile. I’ve got a funny feeling that he might rather like that in a twisted way. Those of you rubbing your hands at a month of peace from him had better look out when he gets back. You couldn’t make it up.

Exile 1976 wrote:

Triangle wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

2. To assist with the smooth running of the website, moderator decisions should not be debated publicly on the forum. If you feel a moderator has made an unfair or wrong decision then please PM the site admin directly who will review your complaint, discuss it further and if necessary take appropriate actions.

"Sir , sir, the bigger boys are breaking the rules"

Triangle you absolute saddo!

Huh, read the paragraph again. You are incorrect in your assumption and in your comprehension of the paragraph. People have a complaint channel available, I am merely highlighting it for them. Not sure if some of the posters in this thread are aware of it.

Ps you know the club moved the shop across the bridge just to piss you off

Triangle wrote:

Exile 1976 wrote:

Triangle wrote:

2. To assist with the smooth running of the website, moderator decisions should not be debated publicly on the forum. If you feel a moderator has made an unfair or wrong decision then please PM the site admin directly who will review your complaint, discuss it further and if necessary take appropriate actions.

"Sir , sir, the bigger boys are breaking the rules"

Triangle you absolute saddo!

Huh, read the paragraph again. You are incorrect in your assumption and in your comprehension of the paragraph. People have a complaint channel available, I am merely highlighting it for them. Not sure if some of the posters in this thread are aware of it.

Ps you know the club moved the shop across the bridge just to piss you off

Nope, I still believe your main point of posting that was the point of 'moderator decisions should not debated publicly on the forum' ... That is very you.

Oh don't worry, I can live with not paying out lots of money on County merchandise throughout the season if no shop at the ground .

Triangle wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

2. To assist with the smooth running of the website, moderator decisions should not be debated publicly on the forum. If you feel a moderator has made an unfair or wrong decision then please PM the site admin directly who will review your complaint, discuss it further and if necessary take appropriate actions.

Thanks O triangular one, that’s a few of us gone for a bit then, didn’t know about that one, will have to have a read sometime. You’ve just dobbed us in it’ll be awful quiet on here , free rein for some though. I can understand there’s some sense in punishment of exposing identities of people who don’t want to be known but how on earth then could there be a mechanism of debating whether messageboard rules are fair? And how to change them?

lowandhard wrote:

Triangle wrote:

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

2. To assist with the smooth running of the website, moderator decisions should not be debated publicly on the forum. If you feel a moderator has made an unfair or wrong decision then please PM the site admin directly who will review your complaint, discuss it further and if necessary take appropriate actions.

Thanks O triangular one, that’s a few of us gone for a bit then, didn’t know about that one, will have to have a read sometime. You’ve just dobbed us in it’ll be awful quiet on here , free rein for some though. I can understand there’s some sense in punishment of exposing identities of people who don’t want to be known but how on earth then could there be a mechanism of debating whether messageboard rules are fair? And how to change them?

How and Lard

Your assumption is wrong. Read it in the context of the rules, not a banning.

I think if people want to debate rules it should be done in the everything else section. Me, I appreciate the effort the Mods put in. Can’t imagine it is a fun thing to ban someone temporarily or permanently, so when it comes to a decision on someone being banned, I don’t question or remonstrate on here. I have been temporarily banned myself...somewhat incorrectly, but it is what it is....do I want to take up the moderating...No

“Dobbed” ...now there is a word I have haven’t heard in a quarter of a century !!! Made me smile.

jollysuperstar wrote:Cornish spot on he broke the rule that states a contributor should not inform all of us that another contributor has a brother when he said he didn,t.
Clearly a month ban
You could, t make it up or could you?
By the way the contributor in question with or without a brother is still incognito of course.
Head starting to spin now

You made most of that up. No wonder your head is spinning. I just hope it doesn’t cause Stan too much discomfort given where your head is generally kept.