Game week 34 | Page 33 | Vital Football

Game week 34

I think last season did it for him with it basically being the entire forum vs payola on the issue of Cooper.
Since then he has been quite aggressive in like 80% of his posts. I don't see much that actually crosses the line - maybe the odd one here or there- its more like a constant drip of bafflingly aggressive posting.
I always thought he was pretty funny tbh, and him being an actual Forest fan I'd have let him off personally, but mr Fear will do what he will do.
 
Barry Goldie said:
How many times has the bloke been banned in the past few months or so alone? Must be 3 at least. suspect more historically. Obviously unstable or piss taking on the wind up. Either way shown can't be trusted to give the respect other posters deserve.

Not that he's ever sent anything my way though.
Click to expand...
I suspect it wasn't, but you think if someone is "piss taking on the wind up" that deserves a ban?
 
Barry Goldie said:
How many times has the bloke been banned in the past few months or so alone? Must be 3 at least. suspect more historically. Obviously unstable or piss taking on the wind up. Either way shown can't be trusted to give the respect other posters deserve.

Not that he's ever sent anything my way though.
Click to expand...

He might be a lovely guy in person but on here he comes across as someone with anger issues. All it takes is seeing an honest football opinion that he disagrees with for him to start hurling insults.

He told me yesterday that if he gets banned again then he won't be coming back but I'd bet my last penny he will be, which is great as I think he's fantastic entertainment.
 
BlackGold said:
I suspect it wasn't, but you think if someone is "piss taking on the wind up" that deserves a ban?
Click to expand...

If it's continued over the top directed at one person just for shits n giggles when uv only just come back from the ban hammer then yeah I'd suggest piss taking in that context should
 
Barry Goldie said:
If it's continued over the top directed at one person just for shits n giggles when uv only just come back from the ban hammer then yeah I'd suggest piss taking in that context should
Click to expand...
Not that my opinion counts for much and like I say I've never had any skin the game with him or anyone on here for that matter
 
Barry Goldie said:
If it's continued over the top directed at one person just for shits n giggles when uv only just come back from the ban hammer then yeah I'd suggest piss taking in that context should
Click to expand...
fair enough, seems a bit wokey for my tastes, but each to their own.
 
Barry Goldie said:
Im as far from woke as you can get trust me. Just think it's the actions of dim wit wasting people's time tbh so fuck them
Click to expand...
Sure, thing is wokey as an adjective considers sensitivity as a bed-fellow; and wishing someone banned for "piss taking or wummery" seems a bit, well, sensitive.
 
BlackGold said:
Sure, thing is wokey as an adjective considers sensitivity as a bed-fellow; and wishing someone banned for "piss taking or wummery" seems a bit, well, sensitive.
Click to expand...
Can't get past the fact that a grown adult sees fit to hit report.
I'd give Pope a pass considering, but God almighty whoever it was must be a right gaylord
 
toms said:
There were some rude comments about Basha and Marco Polo I believe a few pages back. Neither is shy themselves
Click to expand...
Which is why I have never felt the need to hit the alert button.

Personally I couldn’t give a shit whether his, or anyone’s, ban is permanent or just temporary but if you are dumb enough to come back from a ban and post the same shit that got you banned then I am not sure you deserve any sympathy.
 
We have been consulted about what should happen. FWIW it is surprising that Payola came back on here and immediately started laying into people in a very personal way, and it makes me wonder about his motivations and why he would do that. Having said that, I find stupid in-jokes more annoying than any abuse on here. I also think that some of the subjects of abuse, including that from Payola, are also quite happy to dish it out themselves, and that ought to be factored into the sanction. It is also better to have as many people as possible posting on here, rather than just a few people boring each other.
 
chandos9 said:
We have been consulted about what should happen. FWIW it is surprising that Payola came back on here and immediately started laying into people in a very personal way, and it makes me wonder about his motivations and why he would do that. Having said that, I find the stupid in-jokes more annoying than the abuse. I also think that some of the subjects of the abuse are also quite happy to dish it out themselves, and that ought to be factored into the sanction. It is also better to have as many people as possible posting on here, rather than just a few people boring each other.
Click to expand...
Certain posters, we're goading him whilst he was on a ban, the same certain poster was I think responsible for said ban. I am not surprised he came in guns blazing.
That said, rules are rules, even if they are biased.

He's probably done here now, I think he posted as much yesterday, the gaylord worm got what he wanted.

I don't think banning achieves anything at all, not in this day and age.

Some one who is a stubborn fucker would just come back 10x worse and hound the fuck out of his detractors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.