Guilty Or Unlucky?

Just to go back to the topic for a mo...

As the girl lied about her age - and being in the club proves she did - then is it not entrapment of some sort?

Can't the girl be prosecuted for slander/libel/bringing the game into disrepute or whatever?

bwfc1874 wrote:

scottjames30 wrote:Breadman was just trying to cause trouble, the mods saw it , then dealt with it, end of.

Its not the first time.

Is this the happiest day of your life? You're having a great time aren't you?

Is that how your mind works 

Jesus wept.

bwfc1874 wrote:

Jake McHale wrote:Dont see the problem in getting a post deleted.

Everybody gets something different out of a forum. Speaking for myself it's a chance to express and read opinions on a range of topics. 

As '58 says, short of being seriously offensive every view and opinion should be encouraged to give the forum variety. Deleting posts does the opposite.

Yeah i do get that but i suppose there is a reason for this particular incident that we maybe dont know about or would not find it serious but the mods do and they made a decision about it, anyway they can delete some of my posts if they see fit i would not be too upset just part of being on a forum, i get deleted a lot on a salford forum haven't a clue why other than some people dont like it when you speak your mind.

74 wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:We're all just idol puppets taking part in sluffy and nats grand show

That's right, you are

Boggersbelief wrote:

74 wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:We're all just idol puppets taking part in sluffy and nats grand show

That's right, you are

I love the lips on that bird boggers.

Jake McHale wrote:

bwfc1874 wrote:

Jake McHale wrote:Dont see the problem in getting a post deleted.

Everybody gets something different out of a forum. Speaking for myself it's a chance to express and read opinions on a range of topics. 

As '58 says, short of being seriously offensive every view and opinion should be encouraged to give the forum variety. Deleting posts does the opposite.

Yeah i do get that but i suppose there is a reason for this particular incident that we maybe dont know about or would not find it serious but the mods do and they made a decision about it, anyway they can delete some of my posts if they see fit i would not be too upset just part of being on a forum, i get deleted a lot on a salford forum haven't a clue why other than some people dont like it when you speak your mind.

In principle I agree but having read the comments before they were deleted there was no real reason for them to go other than the fact they questioned Nat.

As I've said it's not a massive issue for me - although I might feel differently if my posts get edited, but I'd hope Bread doesn't leave the site completely.

Jake McHale wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:

74 wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:We're all just idol puppets taking part in sluffy and nats grand show

That's right, you are

I love the lips on that bird boggers.

I know where I'd love them

74 wrote:but I'd hope Bread doesn't leave the site completely.

I'd agree if this wasn't the first time he threatened to leave, seems to me that he just enjoys people begging him to stay.

If he was serious about leaving the site then it would have already happened without him telling anyone.

Listen up fuckwits.

I put a fucking lot of effort into this site. Granted, not everything I post is going to win any awards, but if you don't like a thread I start then don't fucking post in it.

There are way too many posters on here who love to criticise me and other aspects of this site, but can't be arsed doing anything about it themselves by starting an interesting thread or writing an article.

Breadman's posts were removed yesterday because every single one was moaning about how a thread had already been done, how he didn't like it, and other petty bullshit. This came not a week after he'd slagged sluffy off for trying to grow the site by making people register if they wanted to make use of Radio Nuts. I am also trying to help grow this site and it doesn't help when you've got someone like Breadman intent on taking it down. He was sent a PM telling him to shut the fuck up or he would be banned, he chose not to shut up. His ban has now been lifted, but he's on thin ice.

This is a forum folks, run by a bunch of Bolton fans who put up with all this shit without taking a penny from the site. In fact some actually put money in so you can post on here. So if you don't like it, fuck off somewhere else. Or better still, start your own forum and see how you like dealing with these moaning, childish wankers. It really is that simple.

Ok, now I think sluffy and Nat are the same person.

Boggersbelief wrote:Ok, now I think sluffy and Nat are the same person.

It's taken you over 2 years to cotton on?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:Ok, now I think sluffy and Nat are the same person.

It's taken you over 2 years to cotton on?

I'm a busy man

Jesus.

As it happens, I thought Bread was making a few decent points about the dangers of compulsory registration - in a conversational way.

He wasn't going OTT about it as I recall - just observing that e.g. there was a likelihood that those who tune in for the Radio Nuts broadcast (from far flung corners I'd imagine) have already been given the option to register and declined.

This is your baby Sluff and nobody has the right to tell you how to run it. We are all your guests.
I just think that on that occasion, Bread was simply trying to be helpful and where it foundered was a difference in attitude towards lurkers - Bread doesn't mind them or think they'll change their ways even if they register whereas you hope they'll become active. Is that a fair analysis?

Natasha Whittam wrote:Listen up fuckwits.

This is how Thatcher began every cabinet meeting.

wanderlust wrote:As it happens, I thought Bread was making a few decent points about the dangers of compulsory registration - in a conversational way.

My take on it, Lusty: Mods/Admins came up with the idea of a forum, they put their coin and time and effort into getting it where it is currently. They not only facilitated a forum where we can all come and talk shite together, they innovate. Yes, I'm saying "they" because I'm not taking credit for things I had no input in although I am a part of the group. An innovation was the chatbox - unique to Bolton forums as far as I know. Radio Nuts is another.

If you want to like peoples' photos and posts on Facebook, you have to join Facebook. There is no two ways around it. Similarly, if you want to enjoy the innovations that Nuts provide, join Nuts. there is no cost to it, obviously, and if RandomFan1 joins the forum, logs in on the day of each game to make one post - namely, "Will there be Radio Nuts on today?" he qualifies as a member in good standing and is welcome to enjoy the unique features we provide.

Deciding to not have anything to do with us - even going as far as slagging us off for doing nothing more than trying to be the type of forum we'd have wanted to join before starting Nuts, but wanting to enjoy our unique facilities, goes against the grain. He expressed his view, we expressed ours. That does not make Bolton Nuts a communist state, and suggesting that is offensive. Obviously, we are not going to agree on every point, but at some point we have to agree to disagree or there is no point in co-existing on here. That's far more than I meant to say...

Oh.....ban over, I see.

(Again......)

For what it's worth (and before I get binned again probably), I'd just like to say this:

If I'm such a cunt who's intent on dragging Nuts down as Whittam / Sluffy / The Invisible Fucking Mod is making out above, would I really have tweeted Neil Danns yesterday promoting Nuts and asking him to get involved?

A move which resulted in somebody behind the scenes deciding that Nuts would start to "follow" me on Twitter (and don't say you didn't realise it was me because I commented in it on a thread on here yesterday).

Equally, would I have left a message on that cyclist girl's charity donation page last week, name-checking Nuts and telling her we were all behind her? (As far as I know, I'm the only one who was switched on enough to seize this opportunity for some free advertising for the site.)

It's your site at the end of the day and you can do what you like with it but I can't help thinking that if Sluffy and Whittam are the same person, he could have avoided any of this bad feeling by not sending the contradictory PM's that he did at Christmas (Copies of which I still have saved.)

And that last bit explains why I got slapped with a ban yesterday.

Sluffittham is shit scared that I will circulate them to the membership at large and stir up some real shit.

But I'm not going to do that - it serves no purpose and can only lead to bad things happening.

You have my word.

However, I reserve the right to speak my mind (within the boundaries of the site's rules) and shall continue to do so.

Until you ban me again.

Probably.

If anybody wants me after I get binned again, contact Boncey as he has my e-mail address.

I don't want a ban, but I'm not kowtowing to anybody on here - if I break the rules, fair enough but I didn't yesterday and Whittam decided that a light-hearted prod about recycling the same threads over and over again was in some way a move beyond the pale.

And if that's worthy of a ban, we might as well all pack up and go home now.....

So just for the record Nat is the owner of this site?

Although I've popped in and out of the site since yesterday evening this is the first time I've actually had the time to post my views on things.

I did not see most of the stuff that was removed (3 posts as far as I know?) and not read any pm's, so I don't know much of what was said, or why.

I don't want anybody to leave the forum - in fact we've just managed to get more or less 80 new members to join up via putting it as a condition to hear Nuts Radio - but at the end of the day we simply can't please everyone.

All I do know is that a relatively few people (for reasons of their own) put in a fair amount of their own time and effort to make this place as enjoyable as we can - and share, in the best we know how, this enjoyment with the rest of you.

There's no catch either - we don't want anybody's money, nor do we wish to make money off the back of the site (like Burnden Aces, JA606 and Bolton Mad, do - to name but three!).  

We don't want your names or addresses, we do need an email in order to keep out spammers but it's easy to set a dummy one up just to use for this forum and keep your personal email accounts to yourselves.

The site is free to join, we do work hard to give you stuff other sites don't such as Radio Nuts, Chatbox, regular banner changes, etc - and we are working on a couple of other things behind the scenes to give to you also - one of them is free screen saves (that possibly can be personalised for you) - as long as you don't mind having the Bolton Nuts logo and/or website address on it.

Yes I know this may not be much in the scheme of things but it is a million times more than any other site as even dreamt of giving you.

We've asked loads of times in the past for people to help us in any little way they can but apart from a few good people such as NickFazer and CEF (who run competitions for the site) and LPP who has written some cracking articles for our NewsNow link that we worked so hard to get (in order to publicise the site further, to attract more 'Nutters'), then most other people haven't volunteeered anything at all.

Don't get me wrong, people are under no obligation to do so - nor are the 'lurkers' who have viewed this site almost daily for months (and in some cases years) and have never once posted (or posted just a handful of times) obligated to volunteer anything to the site by way of getting involved by sharing their views and opinions with the rest of us on the 'forum' - you know that 'speaky' 'communicatey' sort of place we are on.

We, the backroom staff want to do 'Nuts' for all of us (including ourselves) - and the more of us who chip in with things to make the site busier and better for us all - the more enjoyacle it is for everyone.

Yes it seems one or two things have bren said recently - that may / may not have been said to help us - and may / may not have been taken the wrong way by some.

Yes, a view or two question me if what I was doing with membership/Nuts Radio was the right way to go.  Eighty members later ( and a good few more I suspect from the next few away matches where fans will tune in rather than attend) seems to suggest I was on the right path.

I didn't take offence at what was said, or how it was said - I just thought I knew my market better than others - and got on with things.

However clearly not everybody is as thick skinned (or is it simply as thick!) as me.

Sometimes when it is quiet on the forum some people (me included) will start a thread or two - on something in the news (or trending as the youngsters say) that day.  Sometimes it might not be the best topic to post up - it may have been done to death before, or something - but it is done with the best of intention to keep the site ticking over - giving people something to see and read and hopefully find interesting enough to reply to.

We all can start a thread - but the simple fact is that it is often left to the usual suspects to do so.

Maybe it was wrong to react to the perceived negativity that some replied with, maybe there was an over reaction.  Maybe there is a bit of personal history / animosity - I don't know.

All I do know is that things needed to have ended had they did last night.

We, the people behind the scenes, are just like everyone else - human.  We do make mistakes, we do get pissed off at times, we do occassionally do the wrong things.

Perhaps the messanger got shot once to often - and shot back because he could do.  Maybe he shot first and asked questions later.  Maybe he wasn't the one that pulled the trigger!

I would like to apologise to Bread if he felt any wrong was done to him.  

I would like to apologise to Natasha if 'she' felt she found hersrlf in a position she did not want to be in.

I would like to apologise to the site if we seem to be selfdistructing again - over nothing really.

One positive from all of this is that people (on both sides of the Nuts fence) care enough to express the views on what is the right way to go for the site.

We've got to learn from this, that everything said to the site isn't always meant to be negative - and equally the more people that want to help contribute to the site in someway (by that I mean volunteer to lend a hand, or post more, or even begin to start to post, etc, etc) the less of the burden the few of us trying to continually make Nuts a success, will have to keep on shouldering - and thus every so often maybe getting things wrong.



Posted from the heart of a true (armchair) Wanderers fan who simply wants to have a bit of a craic with fellow whites.

Not much to ask for really.  

Is it?

Disgraceful post! Not one mention of Sir Brucie.
I resign!