Ferocious Aardvark wrote:So if you feel the need to tell anyone to STFU, don't include someone who already had. It's illogical.
If I'd have told you to STFU, I would have put it in no uncertain terms. I haven't, and purely feel instead of doing it in threads and derailing the thread, do it elsewhere.
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:I also resent your "every post on here" remark. I reserve the right if I so choose to reply to personal attacks (as no doubt would you) but most of what I post is, so far as I am concerned, on topic and reasoned, and in no way 'bickering' etc.
Yes, I've already said I meant 'every thread on here' rather than 'every post' and no, I don't reply to personal attacks against me. I grew past that stage a while back, maybe you should too?
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:For example you may have the view that most people want McNamara out. Do you insist that nobody disagrees with you? Or if they do, is it 'bickering'?
Nope, I respect the opinions of others - to which those who know me personally on here will know that.
You and Eddie are actually quite alike in terms of trying to get the last word in, and being so protective of your opinions. The posts I've read often lead me to believe that either of you would continue until the other one agrees with the others opinion.
Adeybull wrote:But its not helped by other highly-disenchanted fans rallying to his perverted cause because it provides an easy focus for discontent without the requirement for practicable solutions.
Was that aimed at me? If so, how am I rallying to his cause? Sure, I've known Eddie before rlfans through the Bullrage message board, to which Eddie was a moderator on there. However, my aim isn't to defend him, he has said some pretty dastardly stuff, but he isn't alone.
My focus of discontent is aimed at threads being derailed due to 3 people taking digs at each other and boosting their own egos (FA, Eddie, Tiger) which just lead to meaningless dialogue for the rest of us.
So yeah, I hope that wasn't aimed at me as I actually had you down to be one of the reasonable posters, if not a little confused with your own feelings at times (ie.. negative one week, positive the next).
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:The common denominator in the threads he is complaining about would seem to be you. The person who starts off this stuff would also seem to be you. The person who makes repeated efforts to get a rise would also seem to be you.
It's not just him. Whoever starts it, shouldn't. Whoever replies to it, shouldn't. What makes it worse is that you're all above 20 years of age, probably with a wife and/or kids but let's be honest - you're acting like kids.
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:If Paul124897 or anyone else wants to read your stuff unopposed they should say so. If they agree with you, I never said anyone wasn't free to do that. And if Paul124897 is fair then while he may not like my disagreeing with you, he should realise that not disagreeing with you would leave you to post unopposed.
Debate is good. Where did I say I wanted to read things unopposed? I want to read a debate that doesn't include mindless name calling or extremities such as a certain poster should commit suicide because he has an opinion that someone doesn't agree with (I'm looking at you Tiger Beer).
Get your opinions out on the table, but don't try to change somebodies opinion. If someone is being outrageous, just laughing and move on. He/She is entitled to that opinion.
Now, to draw this post to a conclusion, I have no spat with either of you. As I've said, debate is good. But debate really loving sucks when wading through pages of nonsense.
You've all said valid points in regards to the club and where it is at.
) record, I suspect I'm more in the positive tendancy . . . though with less and less to be positive about>
