The Wrestling Thread

People shouldn't be banned for being different.

boltonbonce wrote:Is describing someone as a ponce homophobic?
Simple question.

Where I come from (Preston), ponce is a "soft bastard".

y2johnny wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:Simple question to the mods: if Johnny, Breadman or Bonce had described their toilet habits in detail would they have been banned?

Id hope i would. I'm nobody in the grand scheme of things on here.  But then have i ever done that. I'm not part of anyone's clique. I try to get on with everybody and enjoy a bit of a barney like everyone else.  I get on with boggers and scott most of the time and think this is all a bit on top now.

Everyone needs to fucking chill out

  Good call mate, it's all getting very dark!!!!

Natasha Whittam wrote:People shouldn't be banned for being different.

Who fucking said they should. No one. Are you fucking lucid today or what. Its YOUR mods he was constantly having a pop at. Break character and stop being a tool or you will end up losing even more by there own choice

It's not dark, it's simply wondering why some posters get banned and some don't.

The other day Johnny registered a fake account but not a dicky bird from the mods. If that had been Scott or Jake it would have been a banning offence.

y2johnny wrote:

Who fucking said they should.  No one. Are you fucking lucid today or what. Its YOUR mods he was constantly having a pop at.  Break character and stop being a tool or you will end up losing even more by there own choice

If I lose the homophobes I'll be happy.

There's no point me trawling the gay sites trying to drum up business only for you bellends to welcome them with anti-gay photos.

Natasha Whittam wrote:It's not dark, it's simply wondering why some posters get banned and some don't.

The other day Johnny registered a fake account but not a dicky bird from the mods. If that had been Scott or Jake it would have been a banning offence.

I let the mods know i was doing it for a joke as i had a finale planned on the agony uncle thread til you bulldozed it.  Next fucking arguement.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

y2johnny wrote:

Who fucking said they should.  No one. Are you fucking lucid today or what. Its YOUR mods he was constantly having a pop at.  Break character and stop being a tool or you will end up losing even more by there own choice

If I lose the homophobes I'll be happy.

There's no point me trawling the gay sites trying to drum up business only for you bellends to welcome them with anti-gay photos.

Wrestling meme. It was more insulting to wrestlers then gays

Next

Nat was that a hunch or did you know it was johnny?

Boggersbelief wrote:

Sluffy wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:I'm just pointing out the double standards on here.

Funny that.

Almost as though you are deliberately going out of your way to wum.

Anyway if you don't like it here please feel free to go and post somewhere else which is much more in line as to how you feel a forum should be modded.

Thank you.

Do not accuse me of being a wum without any evidence. You are starting to contradict yourself now, actively seeking out new members, ignoring homophobia yet castigating Jake just because he described his toilet habits (I believe that is the reason he was banned).. And to top it off you're now telling a long serving member to leave.

You couldn't run a bath

And don't accuse me of not being able to run a bath without any evidence either!

It's clear to all what you are up to but I'll give you the facts one last time.

The person behind Jake had been banned multiple times before on here - and that's not even counting the number of posts we've had to mod or remove from him.

He was given one last chance to return - yet still posted stuff that had to be removed, which led to a clear and final warning - and still he stuck two fingers up to us.

We had an open discussion behind the scenes on here on him and no one  - (let me repeat that - no one) posted anything in support for him - let alone seeking one further final chance.

For the record it is not the first time he's gone out of his way to be banned by a forum.  He's had previous form of this.  So he knew full well what he was doing and the almost certain consequences of his actions.

I doubt he even gives a fuck about it.

No one else does either - just you.

Funny that.

Boggersbelief wrote:Nat was that a hunch or did you know it was johnny?

As she owns the site and can check ips then you figure it out

Natasha Whittam wrote:It's not dark, it's simply wondering why some posters get banned and some don't.

The other day Johnny registered a fake account but not a dicky bird from the mods. If that had been Scott or Jake it would have been a banning offence.

without prejudice, I think the dude got banned due to a culmination of personal anti-social hate over a period of time, he over stepped the mark once to often!!!!

I think you'll find that Nat and scott also have a problem with what happened, read the thread before you reply next time.

By the way, what am I up to?

Boggersbelief wrote:I think you'll find that Nat and scott also have a problem with what happened, read the thread before you reply next time.

By the way, what am I up to?

They really don't. As you don't. Its all bollocks and for shits and giggles. Life at the top of the food chain eh

I care. I am Bolton's mots famous fan, people follow my work.

So they pitch up on Nuts and find that half the threads are about Bruce Forsyth and the other half a bunch of ramblings about gay sex and dinner.

I know BWFC are boring as shite, but this site seems to be a site for Bolton fans that don't like football. It's ruining the site. Hence why no fucker posts even if they sign up.

Natasha Whittam wrote:I care. I am Bolton's mots famous fan, people follow my work.

So they pitch up on Nuts and find that half the threads are about Bruce Forsyth and the other half a bunch of ramblings about gay sex and dinner.

I know BWFC are boring as shite, but this site seems to be a site for Bolton fans that don't like football. It's ruining the site. Hence why no fucker posts even if they sign up.

There's a bolton section and a dinner, bruce and gay sex section. You set the site up

Boggersbelief wrote:Nat was that a hunch or did you know it was johnny?

I knew it was Johnny because it was written in the same borderline English. I then checked his IP and it turns out it's about the 5th username he's registered.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Boggersbelief wrote:Nat was that a hunch or did you know it was johnny?

I knew it was Johnny because it was written in the same borderline English. I then checked his IP and it turns out it's about the 5th username he's registered.

Second. Why you now lying

Boggersbelief wrote:I think you'll find that Nat and scott also have a problem with what happened, read the thread before you reply next time.

By the way, what am I up to?

You're looking for a reaction - clearly.

I also repeat - yet again - that no one involved with the running of this site had even a word to say against AD / Jake / Rancid, etc, etc, being banned for good.

Natasha Whittam wrote:I care. I am Bolton's mots famous fan, people follow my work.

So they pitch up on Nuts and find that half the threads are about Bruce Forsyth and the other half a bunch of ramblings about gay sex and dinner.

I know BWFC are boring as shite, but this site seems to be a site for Bolton fans that don't like football. It's ruining the site. Hence why no fucker posts even if they sign up.

Are you saying the only way to save the site is for certain posters to leave?