The future of Nuts

boltonbonce wrote:Looks like it's just you, Bob.

You do realise that in the film that the man who stood alone in face of all the others was proved right in the end and the rest who wanted to send the innocent man to the electric chair, were wrong don't you!

Sluffy wrote:

You do realise that in the film that the man who stood alone in face of all the others was proved right in the end and the rest who wanted to send the innocent man to the electric chair, were wrong don't you!

I do. But as you see in the film, attitudes flip. It goes both ways. Great film though.

By the way Bob, can you recommend a decent hosepipe?

I'm having much more fun being unable to see Bob's comments and trying to guess what they might be. Probably can't do him justice though, no matter how low I sink....

okocha wrote:I'm having much more fun being unable to see Bob's comments and trying to guess what they might be. Probably can't do him justice though, no matter how low I sink....

I reckon the name 'Vince' would pop up now and again. We could start a new comp. Bob Bingo.

I can't stop people behaving how they want to (within reason obviously) but don't you (aimed generally and no one in specific) think it's getting a little bit like bullying now?

Bob's obviously has his views on us (again aimed generally and no one in specific) and clearly isn't be going to change them but giving it back and now shunning him like this, isn't that a bit childish and petty thing to be doing too?

Who gives a fuck what he things of us really? (aimed generally and no one in specific).

Just give him the odd nod of acknowledgement and keep in your respective corners and carry on as men are supposed to do and not as a group of mean schoolboys (aimed generally, etc).

Just a thought.

So he can be rude to us, but not us to him?

Sluffy wrote:I can't stop people behaving how they want to (within reason obviously) but don't you (aimed generally and no one in specific) think it's getting a little bit like bullying now?

Bob's obviously has his views on us (again aimed generally and no one in specific) and clearly isn't be going to change them but giving it back and now shunning him like this, isn't that a bit childish and petty thing to be doing too?

Who gives a fuck what he things of us really?  (aimed generally and no one in specific).

Just give him the odd nod of acknowledgement and keep in your respective corners and carry on as men are supposed to do and not as a group of mean schoolboys (aimed generally, etc).

Just a thought.

And this thought you can keep to yourself.

Natasha Whittam wrote:So he can be rude to us, but not us to him?

I saw it more as ganging up.

Just thought it was wrong and more than a little childish.

Fwiw I think both sides are out of order but if you're going to have an internet spat then do it man to man rather than being the 'gang' he accused you of all being.

In an ironic way you are proving the point he's been making in some ways.

Anyway I've had my say, I'll let you all sort it out between yourselves, after school, behind the bike shed.

Sluffy wrote:

I saw it more as ganging up.

Just thought it was wrong and more than a little childish.

Fwiw I think both sides are out of order but if you're going to have an internet spat then do it man to man rather than being the 'gang' he accused you of all being.

In an ironic way you are proving the point he's been making in some ways.

Anyway I've had my say, I'll let you all sort it out between yourselves, after school, behind the bike shed.

You're a bit of an enigma at times Sluffy. You rant and rave at other posters, Wander being a fine example, about things the rest of us barely recognise, and then you go all High and Mighty to protect an openly abusive poster, and when we all complain about his manner, and respond to an obvious troll you call us childish. As you say yourself Sluffy, if you don't agree with it,don't get involved.

I'd laugh if Bob turned out to be Breadman taking the piss.

Sluffy would know it was Breaders, and I doubt he would be so supportive of him.

gloswhite wrote:Sluffy would know it was Breaders, and I doubt he would be so supportive of him.

You can hide on the internet now, but I doubt even Bread could concoct  a character like Bob.

Agreed

gloswhite wrote:Agreed

Its all your fault, Sluffy. Well that's what some of the lynch mob types, the fruitcakes and the blockheads think. But its up to you. I'm not bothered. I don't want to breathe the same air as these people. Just saying like.

boltonbonce wrote:
That got me thrown off Blockbusters.

As your punishment you're getting Bob Holness's take on interior design...

'Five round the front, and two round the sides'.

Sounds like a Martian member of the Chippendales.

gloswhite wrote:You're a bit of an enigma at times Sluffy. You rant and rave at other posters, Wander being a fine example, about things the rest of us barely recognise, and then you go all High and Mighty to protect an openly abusive poster, and when we all complain about his manner, and respond to an obvious troll you call us childish. As you say yourself Sluffy, if you don't agree with it,don't get involved.

I'll get involved where ever I want Glos, it's free world isn't it?

If you see me as an enigma that's up to you mate, as far as I'm concerned I'm honest and straight with everyone.

All high and mighty of me is it to call out bullying when I see it is it? Ok then I must be high and mighty then because I do see it as bullying.

Bobs not a troll he just doesn't have much tolerance of others and is quick to tell them so. Certainly a quick way of making enemies on the internet but then again people's reaction to him confirms to him that he was right about them in the first place.

I see that as an irony in that people are acting in the way he expected them to be in the first place but also a false positive too in the sense that what he posts almost certainly leads many to react in the way he thought they would in the first place - maybe if he hadn't had been so demeaning of others from the start he might have got a different reaction to the one he expected there to be all along.

As for Wanderlust if you've not worked him out by now you are never going to do so and therefore little wonder why you view me as you clearly do.

Not that any of this matters.

Behave as you want but do bear in mind when you do that some random bloke has called you a name on the internet do you a) laugh it off and tell them to go fuck themself or b) get yourselves in a tizzy, gang up on him and stew on it for weeks/months years?

I know what I would do.

It's only the internet when all said and done isn't it?

I simply choose not to see the sort of abuse that Bob gives out going unchecked by the mods. He is an obvious troll and unworthy of attention.

 My decision has nothing to do with "ganging up". It was only this afternoon that I became aware that there is a way of blocking comments, so I used it for my own sake.

It seems odd that posters like xmiles, TROY, Wanderlust etc who are intelligent, fair-minded, articulate posters get harsh treament for their reasoned views when an obvious abusive troll is allowed to say what he likes and not only gets away with it but gets supported. As with our government, it seems there is one rule for us and another for the likes of Bob whom Sluffy opts to defend for some reason that I can't fathom.

Boncey, Norpig, Glos. KP (and Nat?) have evidently been upset unfairly in the recent exchanges. I choose not to see that continue so have blocked the common denominator.