Recognising intelligence

Poor Bob.

@Norpig wrote:I do think you're obsessed as you bring him into almost every post you make these days. You engineer ways to have a go at him just like in this very thread right at the start with your other obsession KA.

I'm not saying Lusty is whiter than white, he knows how to wind you up and you fall for it every time. Call him out at the time of him posting if you need to but this constant returning to the same old arguments is what is killing this site.

@Norpig wrote:

@karlypants wrote:

Have a day off!

Think this is code for you're banned 

I’m sure Tenbob had a nice day away from Nuts with his wife/husband/girlfriend/boyfriend/dog/cat (delete appropriate).

Can you not make it longer KP? Like forever?

@Norpig wrote:Can you not make it longer KP? Like forever?

Unfortunately not. That would have to be discussed with the rest of the mods in the backroom.

How do you do that KP out of interest? Do you email each other or video call or is it all just done in your secret part of the forum?

@Norpig wrote:How do you do that KP out of interest? Do you email each other or video call or is it all just done in your secret part of the forum?

It’s done in the secret part of the forum.

The inner sanctum eh? I bet you go in there and have a right good moan about us lot don't you? 

And he's back 

@boltonbonce wrote:Anyone know why Bob got canned?

Its complex, Boncey. It could  be the Napoleon complex, Superman complex, Knight-Riley complex or a convolvulated concoction of complexes.

Anyroad here's a la'al bit of Conway Twitty for my followers:

Please, I'm still not over Rigid Roger.

@karlypants wrote:
It’s done in the secret part of the forum.

karly while you are on the secret part of the forum could you please reinstate my ability to pm other posters. It's not urgent but it does seem very petty that I am not allowed this facility.

@boltonbonce wrote:Please, I'm still not over Rigid Roger.

If you and I,Boncey, are the only ones on Nuts to find Rigid Roger quite funny does it say summat about us or summat about the rest of 'em?

Hope you enjoyed the Shadow Chancellor clip.

@xmiles wrote:

karly while you are on the secret part of the forum could you please reinstate my ability to pm other posters. It's not urgent but it does seem very petty that I am not allowed this facility.

And, KP, please could you confirm that admin cannot read pms

@Norpig wrote:I do think you're obsessed as you bring him into almost every post you make these days. You engineer ways to have a go at him just like in this very thread right at the start with your other obsession KA.

I'm not saying Lusty is whiter than white, he knows how to wind you up and you fall for it every time. Call him out at the time of him posting if you need to but this constant returning to the same old arguments is what is killing this site.

Well you are quite wrong then.

I posted in reply to the thread and used Anderson as an example of what I was saying as he was someone we all knew about.

He was only one of FOUR examples I used so clearly I didn't focus solely on him.

Anderson whether we like him or not is part of our clubs history such as Nat Lofthouse, John McGinlay and Eddie Davies and its inevitable that his name will always crop up in years to come, and not just by me.

Of course I know that Wanderlust at times attempts to wind me up but that's largely him attempting to distract from manning up from admitting he was wrongly stating fake news and talking bullshit in the first place - which frequently he is.

As for Bob do people really want to go down the path of banning posters simply because they don't like them or what they post?

A dangerous and completely wrong way to go in my opinion.

As they say be careful for what you wish for lest it come true.

Ten bob has driven away regular posters and brings nothing of interest to the forum. If you're happy that your site is going down the pan due to that then good luck and i'll go back on WW

I've counted to 10 now! This is your site Sluffy and run it how you please but surely you can see the effect he has on this site? Most regulars now just ignore him other than me and Boncey.

I genuinely love coming on this site and want to see it flourish and get back to where it was a while ago. 

There is still a place for forums even now as WW proves so we all need to try and make this site better. I'm forever thinking of new threads to post and will keep trying but sometimes i wonder why i bother.

@Norpig wrote:Ten bob has driven away regular posters and brings nothing of interest to the forum. If you're happy that your site is going down the pan due to that then good luck and i'll go back on WW

It's 'our' forum, not 'mine', I merely try and keep it free and fair to everyone whether I like them or not.

If you and others want to take it down a different path then I can't really stop you but what's the point of a forum where only the voice of the 'clique' is heard and fake news and fake accounts are rife?

We've done it 'my' way on here in respect of the site having a basis integrity and honesty to it from the start but clearly that's no longer what people want from me, so as I've been saying for a few weeks now I'll stand back from being too active and posting and let others do it the way they want instead.

Let's see if it is any better shall we?

No one is saying you need to step back Sluffy other than yourself. I don't want to go elsewhere, i feel at home here apart from the geriatric lodger causing issues 

@Norpig wrote:I've counted to 10 now! This is your site Sluffy and run it how you please but surely you can see the effect he has on this site? Most regulars now just ignore him other than me and Boncey.

I genuinely love coming on this site and want to see it flourish and get back to where it was a while ago. 

There is still a place for forums even now as WW proves so we all need to try and make this site better. I'm forever thinking of new threads to post and will keep trying but sometimes i wonder why i bother.

Our posts have crossed.

WW is a site formed by a group of mates who know each other and have been following the Wanderers home and away since the eighties so it's 'core' as always been very strong, unlike most other forums such as ours.

Some/many of these blokes have built contacts/associates within the club and often get inside information as to what's going on before anyone else.

WW was also the first BWFC to really emerge and the one most people (including me) visit daily for the snippets of BWFC news they have.

So we can't compete on a par with WW.

That being said it is not to the taste of everyone and if your face doesn't fit there you don't tend to last long.

Nuts was built around being open to everyone and having a laugh whilst you were here and we did ok for quite a while too before it all went wrong.

No point going over old ground but basically one or two people decided that 'their' fun was more important than everyone else's and added to that the hatred expressed over Anderson, Brexit and the Tories simply went too far and turned the site toxic.

I though that by better informing people would help improve things but instead I've had to deal with people who either can't accept they don't know what they've been talking about or someone who thinks they are clever wanting to get into to never ending arguments for their own amusement.

So if people perceive me to be the problem then as I say I'll stand back and see how the site goes without me trying to keep the 'games' and bullshit off it.

For the 800th time Sluffy the main issue is your geriatric friend!

@Norpig wrote:No one is saying you need to step back Sluffy other than yourself. I don't want to go elsewhere, i feel at home here apart from the geriatric lodger causing issues 

Well what else can we do differently if the problem is seen to be me facing up to fake accounts on a mission and calling out Wanderlust's fake news?

I don't intend to be leaving the site merely cease fighting to keep the site honest anymore, as quite frankly I'm sick and tired of doing so now.

@Norpig wrote:For the 800th time Sluffy the main issue is your geriatric friend!

Then ask BTID and Karly to ban him then.

If they both say yes then I'm outvoted 2 to 1.

I've already said what the main issue is as well you know!

We all know that not everything people post on here about themselves will be at best a white lie, that's not the issue. Does anyone really believe Nat is a woman or that i clean bed pans for a living?

As for Lusty he is entitled to his opinion whether you agree with him or not.

I’ve got Nuts deja vu again

@finlaymcdanger wrote:I’ve got Nuts deja vu again

I'm losing the will to live.

@Norpig wrote:I've already said what the main issue is as well you know!

We all know that not everything people post on here about themselves will be at best a white lie, that's not the issue. Does anyone really believe Nat is a woman or that i clean bed pans for a living?

As for Lusty he is entitled to his opinion whether you agree with him or not.

Wanderlust can hold any opinion he likes, I've no problem with that.

If it is factually wrong though I'll point it out.

And if Nat isn't a woman and you don't clean bed pans then why should anyone believe Wanderlust is a Business Consultant because he's seldom factual in what he says in that respect?

Goodbye all, i tried and failed, see you whenever.

@Norpig wrote:Goodbye all, i tried and failed, see you whenever.

What exactly do you want?

You say Bob should be banned, so ask for a vote.

I've said I'll step back from not keeping the site as honest as I can you you say there's no need for me to do so.

You say 'I know' what the main problem of the site is, well if you're not asking for a vote on Bob and you want me to try and maintain the sites integrity then what is it then because I don't know what you are asking for?

I've offered solutions to both the issues you seem to want and that doesn't seemed to have done the trick for you, so spell it out, what exactly do you want to be done?

A couple of points, Sluffy (3 actually!):

 1. My thread is about whether it is possible to recognise intelligence by looking at someone's face. The US rioters to me looked particularly short of brains, but that may be my prejudice.

You say that you have responded to that, but I can find no trace of a relevant answer from you. Instead you (and others) have taken the debate in a completely different direction that evidently appeals. Not that it really matters to me at all; it's of little significance either way. I don't mind.

2. What do you mean by "an account"? It implies something we pay for. 

I have also asked several times what you mean by a "fake" account, but have never had an answer.
 
  Do you mean one like Nat's  which is clearly not his/her true persona. 

In any case, does it really matter especially if it's entertaining and interesting and is doing no harm?

I can assure you I'm not posting in two different names on here, if that's what you mean.

I do use a different username on the BBC website but it would be bizarre to call myself Okocha on there!

3. I'd also like to know what you mean by "playing games".....