mao tse tung - 17/5/2017 08:14
Woanz - 17/5/2017 07:52
If we're banning annoying things can we ban the pathetic fawning over supposed ITK's until it's proven that they have actually got something ITK also if they say they won't be posting for a set period of time because people have the audacity to question the rammel they are talking then maybe they could be not able to log in for that length of time.
I'm not aiming this at anyone personally it's just long experience of how these ITK things happen. It ends in a lot of fighting over incredibly trivial details and ultimately leaves a lot of normal fans disappointed because the so called ITK is either making up the whole thing or taking one small thing they think they know and running with it.
It could be different this time but I have my doubts.
Please don't give me chapter and verse on how ITK anyone says they are as that only makes me doubt them more. If someone is ITK they don't need their tummy rubbed or all dissent crushed.
ITK stuff is gossip, sometimes informed gossip; when the gossip is proven its called news.
Attacking people just because something that was originally posted has changed is a bit much; and lets face it that's all you are doing.
On the one hand you have a lot of people fretting that the takeover will not take place because of Fawaz and his propensity for changing his mind; on the other hand, Sniffer is being attacked on the basis of Ventros not now being involved.
He has never claimed to be in the know and stated repeatedly that his information was coming from a journalist friend; most of the information has been as accurate as you could expect from such a source.
There is a massive difference between getting first hand information and through a third party, just like there is a massive difference between dissent and abuse.